The Montgomery advertiser., 1908-01-03
Letter to The Editor
Bridge and Road Tax.

Editor The Advertiser:
 Some days ago. mention was made in your columns of the bridge ana l road tax provided for cities ana towns under Section 120 of the Act oc the Legislature denominated the "Munici- pal Code" and at what time said tax should be paid over by the courts of County Commissioners and Boards of Revenue Perhaps the legality CT con- stitutionality of said Section 120 has never occurred to said courts and boards.
 Each law shall contain but one sub- ject, which shall be clearly expressai l in its title, Constitution, Section 45 5. The title of the Act of which Seciion 120 is a part, reads: An Act to provide flor the organization, incorporation government and regulation Of cites and towns and of the officers thereof and to prescribe penalties for the vio- lation of the provisions of this act" Nothing is said in this title al out county officers. nor of controlling CT di- recting the Courts of County C1lnmls- sioners and Boards of Revenue how they shall dispose of or appr0py tate the bridge and road funG of the ccLn- ty. It therefore appears that Seotion 120 of said act contains a subject or subjects altogether foreign to the sEb- ject expressed in the tItIe ot said ect and for that reason is unconstitutiohal and void.
 If the title to sail act cal, by any constrained construction, De said or held to contain IT embody the sub. jects of Section 120. it is stil unCon- stitutional, because the Legislature has no control whatever oyer tho bridge or road tax levied and collected by any county and can pass no valid act as to- its disposition when collected. The Constitution, Section 215, alone author tzes "any county" to levy and collect a special tax for bridges and roads Gt,nyI,f when laVfaA nnh col lected, sn.ll be aplled exclusively 70 the purposes for which, the same were levied and collected" No power iH granted the Legislature to apply the taxes so levied and collected to the cities and towns for streets and bridges, and maintaining them; 1t Is purely matter for the county, and the Courts of County Commissioners and Boards of Revenue cannot apply said taxes to any other purpose than that directed by the Constitution.
 Said Section 120 provides. that when such road or bridge tax Is collected one-haIf of the taxes collected on the property located in the municipality shall be paid over and used ex :lIs sively for the purpose of maintaining the streets and bridges fin the corporate limits of such municipality. Why not take the entire tax? Taking ono half of the tax levied and collected is as much Q diversion or misapplication of the tax as If the whole of 1t was ta- ken. The road or bridge tax is to be used exclusively by the Courts of County Commi ssioners and Boards of Revenue for the erection of necessary public bridges or roads of the county and not for streets and bridges of a city.
 There is another feature rendering Section 120 unconstitutional, in that 1t makes use of the county machinery to levy and collect a street and bridge tax for cities and towns.
 No municipality other than those provided for in Section PIG of the Con- stitution. shall levy and collect a higher rate of taxation in any one year on the value of the property situated therein than one-half of one per cent um. Whenever cities and towns col feet the limit prescribed- and they all do it-no additional or special tax can be levied or collected. although authorized to do so by statute, but. as long as the levy and collection of a special tax remains within the limit f. Is constitutional and valid. Thus we see that a city or town levying and collecting the limit prescribed by the Constitution, cannot, by virtue of Sec ton 12O have tho county to levy and collect a special tax for them What cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. w.