Twice-a-week plain dealer. (Cresco, Howard County, Iowa) 1895-1913, 1909-03-16

and with which none of us would dis
pense, and we do not believe the tax
payers of the town object to airy inn
provement which will of course cost
them their proportionate share of the
city's regular and special taxes. Peo-
pie seeking to locate in town do not
go to the county or city officials to as
certain the tax levy, but pick out
town of enterprise and hustle, with
we'll lighted and passable streets, good
schools, sewerage, city water and like
conveniences which have become an al
solute necessity to modern life. Be-
lieve me Mr.. Kellow, the general tax
payer is not sympathizing with you in
your opposition to a needed improve
ment to your own property.
Seventh-Do you think you are any
more interested in the welfare of our
little city that the property owners
who signed the protest.
No. And right here, Mr.. Kellow let
US remark that we believe that the
PLAIN DEALER in its fOrty-one wears
in Cresco has done as much to build up
Cresco land for no pecuniary reward)
as any one who signed the protest, and
certainly more than the non-residents
who own Cresco property simply for
the profit that it brings them. Fur
thermore, the PLAIN DEALER family
pays taxes on four parcels of Cresco
property and cannot be classed with
those who do not pay their full share of
the city's expense. 1t is nothing new
for newspaper to get such slap as
Mr.. Kellow gives. A newspaper may
aid merchant to get trade, help adj
vertise his town so that people may
come to it with their business and their
homes and their factories, may work to
help some neighbor to an office of
honor or profit; and, sometime after
ward when the newspaper advocates
some scheme which interferes with
their ideas, forget the good the news
paper has done and the help it has
given and ask the newspaper men,
"What do you know about what the
town needs, and what good did you
ever do. any way The newspaper
man expects such kicks-and he gets
them.
Eighth-Is your judgment in regard
to what is best for the city any better
than the signers of this protest.
No, but just as good.
Ninth-Do you think this paving
would have been done, if the mayor
and council haQ TO pay $l75 to $500
each, beside their city tax to do this
paving.
From the tone of Mr.. Kellow's arti-
Gle, we infer that he doesn't think
much of our opinion, so we have taken
the pains to interview most of the al
dermen on this point and all with whom
we have talked unite in saying that the
paving would have been cheerfully done
if they had to pay their share.
Tenth-On your theory could not the
council claimed to have majority of
frontage in favor of paving, if every
property owner on the street had sign
ed the protest, excepting the city,
railroad company and county, which
we do not call property owners.
Our contention is that frontage of
Taxpayers is the test and not the num-
Der of taxpayers.
Eleventh-Do you think the citizens
of Cresco are largely in favor of pay
ing an additional tax for years to come
to pave this street.
We have heard no complaint from any
tax payer aside from among those pro-
testing to the small tax necessary for
whatever the expense of paving to the
city.