The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-01-28
THT TAG TAX.
An Argument Against Appeals. on Glass
 Lines

An Argument Against Appeals on Glass Editor The Advertiser:
 notice in Fridays paper an article advocattng the passage of bill by the present Legislature appropriatlng the guano tag tax to the rural schools of the State. A bill appropriatlng the guano tax to the general school fund is now before the Legislature.
 The writer Of the aiucle mentioned takes the stand that since the tag tax is paid by one class. l. G., the farm CTS. justice and equIty demand that this same class receive directly back this tax in the shape of an increased appro- prlation for rural schools.
 Following the same course of reason Ing t9 it's inevitable conclusion, 1t would be equally Just and equitable for Jefferson County to receive direct ly back into its school fund all it pays general school fund approximateiy $lT3.00O. It receives from the Sd ne source s53,6S7. In other words, JefTer- son gives to the schools of the other than 1t receives. True, this is derived from the three mill tax for schools, which Is State tax and Is paid on all property alike: Yet the fact remains that this tax is paid by clas" of peo- pie who do not follow farming, and who give to the agricultural counties, and on tax basis these counties are the poorer ones, more than twice the
 
 same condl ton of affairs obtains in all the wealtnier counties of the State. do not argue that these counties should receive back all they pay out, but say this: Lee LIS be careful, while leg ls4ating to benefit ole class of cur peo- pie not to forget the rights of others.
 Again, 1t might be affirmed with equal fairness that. because certain li- eense taxes go into the school fund and are paid by particular classes of indi- viduals these same classes should re- ceiye the taxes back for their own schools.
 Last year. if I remember correctly, the tag tax brought in something 1 Ike $I0O,000 This amount divided among the 500,00c school children of the rural districts would give each child 20 cents. Granting that tne average rural school distr.ct contains 100 children, which is eonsideraoiy above the actual figures, we have only $2O increas for each school This increase of itself would not perceptibly lenothen the school term nor be of much uelp in securing the services of an assistant Over and above all this, the tag tax is really paid by the manufacturer and dealer. his assertion is proven by the f4ct that in Mississippi ami other States, where conditions like unto those in Alabama prevail except that there is no tag tax, guano sells TOT the sa ne money that 1t brings in Alabama. There are several ways in which this tag tax can be spent that in the end will be of far more worth to the farm CTS and to the State at large than the proposed way. The present tag tax, us l understand 1t, serves a threefoId purpose: Supports the nine District Agricultural Schools, the State> Depart ment of Agriculture and Industries and helps to support the A. P. l. at Auburn.
 The nine agricultural schools of the State are doing a great work. They are training hundreds of worthy young men and women for t-achlng, and are sending back home a large number to introduce progressive and scientific methods in farming. Practically these schools are the onl-, high schools in the State where boy fresh from the farm can secure adequate high school train ing at minimum cost. From these schools most of the young men and women now teaching in the rural schools get what they have of zeal and inspiration. If our rural school system Is ever quickened into life, it must be through the fostering influence of the agricultural school.
 At present the agricultural schools receive an annual appropriation of $2.- 5Qo each, 9 total of $22,5O0. This money divided among the school children oi the State gives less than cents to each child. Which is worth the more to the State, paltry cents for each child or these nine schools? Common sense and the interests of the who 2 people demand that the appropriauon to these schools be doUhled, and thai the same approximation be taken from the tag tax.
 As for the rest of the tag tax, spend It in enlarging the scope and efficieacy or the Department of Agriculture and lndustr.es. and in further.ng the work at Auburn. Some of it might very prohtabl be spent in encouragin im- migration to the state. Nothing, in the lon~ run could be of more lasting ben cit to our farmers and the whole State as for that matter. than the coming of thrifty, intelligent and virtuous immi- srapts. Respectfully,
 c. L. Tompkins.