The Colfax chronicle. [volume] (Colfax, Grant Parish, La.) 1877-1981, 1912-09-21
WRITE FOR CAIALOG

Gov. Hall Calls Representative Han
Down About the Tax Amend
ment.
STATE OF LOUISIANA, !
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT,
Baton Rouge, Sept. II, 1912.
Editor CoJa1 Chronicle:
| have received copy of the Chron
icle of recent date in which appears
communication purporting to have bee
written by Hon. 7. o. Hart, represent
alive of. your parish in the General AS
sembly, condemning the proposed ia,
amendment on three or four grounds
| do not question his sincerity or goot
faith, but must say, with all due re
spect, that he is grossly in error, a.
will appear to any one who will reae
the amendment.
The plan is simple, although the
many details with which it was neces.
sary to deal make the proposed amend
ment somewhat lengthy. According to
the plan, the State selects certain
property. such as railroads, telegraph
lines, banks, etc. from which to raise
the revenue necessary to maintain the
State government and its institutions,
and leaves all other property to the
parishes and municipalities to be taxed
for local purposes. The State gives up
its right to levy any taxes at all on the
property unsegregated or remaining to
the local governments, and also its
right to levy licenses, except for the
sale of liquor or other businesses fall
ing within the scope Of what is called
the police power. The farmers, mer-
chants. and others owning the unsegre-
gated property, are relieved absolutely
of the payment of any kind of State
tax. The people of the parishes save
the tax paid to the State under the pres
ent system, and all licenses, except liq-
uor licenses, as referred to above.
Now, for the loss of the parish tax
on the railroads and other segregated
property, the parishes are given the
power in their discretion to levy as
much of the six mill State tax as may
be necessary for local governmental
purposes. Under the present system,
the owners of lands and other property
In Grant parish, in addition to special |
taxes, are subject to ten mills parish
tax and about six mills State tax. I'm
der the proposed system, if the parish
saw fit to increase the ten mill tax to
sixteen mills, the taxpayers would not
pay any increase, and yet the entire
sixteen mills would go to the parish for
local purposes, and not one cent of it
would go to the State. In no event
could taxes for local purposes be in
creased under the proposed system be-
vond what the property holders pay un-
Ter the present system. |,
The parish of Grant would gain great
y under the new plan, as is shown by :
ne following statement, which is based 1
m the assessment of 1911, taking a
parish tax of ten mills as the basis:
Total assessment 1911 80. 81, 237, 498 0O
segregated to. State -........ 615,2 0C
Remaining to parish :. 1922, 1879 90 (
'ix mills surrendered by
State on So, 622, 1879. 21. 733 1el
.ess ten mills surrendered
by parish on $615, 299 49,. 6.l52 9eI
Net gain to parish. 5 1850 20 n
1t is thus clearly seen that without
'creasing the taxes of the parish of
rant one cent beyond what it pays un- o
or the present system, the parish will
'ceive, under the proposed system, e
5,6S0. 20 more than the taxes on the
roperty surrendered to the State. The is
arlsh will therefore be gamer by sl5,-
'0.2O. If the parish should not deem al
necessary to levy a greater tax than
'e ten mills now allowed by law. tho n