Perth Amboy evening news., 1909-03-13
STOKES ON
MONEY FOR
THE SCHOOLS
Does Not Believe that II Is
a Question of More or
Less Money.
ISSUE BETWEEN STATE
AND THE MUNICIPALITIES
Former Governor Gives Out
an Interview on Railroad
Tax and Schools.
Special to the EVENING NEWS.

Special to the EVENING NEWS
Trenton, March 3:-Ex-Governor
Edward c. Stokes does not believe
that the vital question involved In
the proposed repeal of the act OF
1905 appropriating a certain per-
centage of the main stem railroad
taxes to the public school system Is
whether the schools should receive
more or less money, but he is
strongly of the belief that the real
issue is between the municipalities
and the state. In response to re-
quests which recently have been
made by newspaper men, Mr.. Stokes
today gave expression to his views
regarding the so-called school
moneys derived from railroad taxa
tion. During his long career in the
legislature and throughout his term
as governor Mr.. Stokes was regarded
as an authority upon the public
school system of this state, OF whstH
he has always been an ear1est adj
vocate.
Il want It to be understood In
this interview" said Mr.. Stokes to-
day, that ] am not in any way dis
cussing the financial problem of the
state. That is a matter that is in
the hands of the legislature and the
governor, who are the proper parties
to solve it and who are giving it
painstaking and conscientious study,
and 1t is not my purpose to become
involved in pending financial cons
troversiee.
Apart from this problem, how
ever, there are certain phases OF the
so-called school moneys, or the In
creased revenue from tie railroad
main stem under the Perkins act OF
1906 which have almost escaped at
tention The dedication of the in
crease in the main stem tax to the
taxpayers for the use of the public
schools has apparently overshadowed
the fundamental fact that these
moneys do not belong to the state
for state uses, but to the localities
for local uses. This distinction Is Of
the highest Importance. The agite-
ton for equal taxa<on, In Aeality for
increased tax on the railrdadsi sas
not begun by the state, but y the
localities. The state made no claim
that it was not receiving sufficient
amount of tax from the railroads It
they were not receiving a sufficient
amount of tax as compared with the
amount they were receiving from In
dividuals.
"As an illustration Jersey City iEa-
sisted, not that the state should re-
ceive more revenue from the rail-.
roads. but that that municipality
should receive an increased revenue
-. l., T. L.
the burden of taxation TO the lp--
dividual taxpayer. The whole--c5-
ject of Jersey City's contention wsv
to increase their revenues, not the
revenues of the state.
Because the state levies tax 10
does not follow that the proceeds
belong to The state for state uses.
The franchise tax upon public utili-
ties amounting to $73S,T14.04. Is
levied by the state, but the proceeds
of this tax belong to the localities
and is a part of their revenue. In
view of the fact that this is franz
chise tax and not a tax upon per-
sonalty and realty, 1t could, perhaps,
be more properly considered as a
state revenue than the increased tax
on the main stem, which is almost
entirely tax upon real estate and
personally.
THE legislature had the right to
exercise it's discretion as to what
special local use, If any, this money
should be devoted. The legislature
did exercise that discretion and de-
clared it should be used for current
school purposes for the reduction OF
local school taxes. / have always
felt that this act of the legislature
was an act of such patriotic foresight
and educational spirit as to mark IL
as one of the important chapters In
our state history.
Both the taxpayers and the
schools have benefited by this poll
cy, These moneys, II should be re-
membered, cannot be used for spec-
ial objects as for the purchase OF
land or the erection or improvement
Of school buildings. They can be
used only for general school pur-
poses; teachers salaries, fuel, text
books and other current expenses,
objects that inure to the benefit OF
all Of the children OF the state, no
matter in what section they reside.
THE figures tell an interesting
story. I quote them as furnished me-
last fall by the department of pub
lie instruction. l cite this that the
public may know that these figures
were not prepared under the inhu-
enee of q controversial atmosphere.
Owing to litigation the first payment
Of the proceeds OF the increased tax
upon the main stem, the state re-
serving the part 1t had always re-
ceived from THIS source. was delayed
and could not be distributed to the
localities for use, until the school
year beginning July 1, 1908. and
July /, 1909. A comparison Of local
school taxes between this year and
last, therefore. reveals the benefits,
II any, due to the present state poll
cy. Last year, 1s07-0S. the taxpay-
ers Of the state were compelled to
raise for local school purposes sz,-
755,s06.12. This year the same
taxpayers raised only s2.212,64I-96
reduction in the amount OF local
Continued on page 4.)