Graham guardian., 1915-04-16
HIGHER TAXATION CRY is
A BUGABOO


will be held on Tuesday, May l1th,
in less than month, and the peo.
pie of Stafford and their friends
throughout the county must be up
and doing, working on the job all
the time, and there's reason:
At the beginning Of the fight for
county seat removal there seemed to
benodoubt but that Pima andThatch
er would be- in the race as candi-
dates with Stafford. and there was
no jealous feeling on the part of the
people of Stafford toward either
town because they were candidates
1t was naturally supposed that the
people Of Pima and Thatcher would
be ambitious and work hard to be
selected as the new county seat.
This ambition was conceded and
commended by the people of SAT-
ford and it was considered fore
gone conclusion that there would be
three candidates for the new county
seat.
But now comes change. For
some reason, Pima concludes that
she has no chance to be selected as
the new county seat and she is now
working hard to defeat the election
of Stafford by working up a senti-
ment against county seat removal.
declaring that additional taxation
for building a new court house will
be too much of a burden for the
people and that they should vote
NO.
Pima's object is plain. If 90 per
cent of the voters of Graham county
vote NO at the county seat removal
election, the county seat will not be
removed and the question of county
seat removal cannot be brought up
again for six years. During these
six years, Pima expects that her
population and that of the adjacent
settlements will increase to more
than double and that she will stand
a better show to be chosen as the
new county seat at a county seat
removal election at that time.
The fight now shifts on Thatcher
and Stafford. To the best of our
belief Thatcher is still a candidate,
though there are those who say that
she is now working on the same
plan as Pima and bringing in the
plea that higher taxation would be
burdensome.
The facts in the case are that
Stafford, the one safe and logical
site for the new county seat, is
holding her own against the com.
bined forces of Thatcher and Pima
and as Pima would not vote for
Thatcher, or Thatcher for Pima.
the fight will be to get 40 per cent
Of the people to vote NO on county
seat removal, in the hope that by
defeating county seat removal, their
chances will be better at a subse.
quent election.
The cry of higher taxation is far
fetched, indeed. If the people de-
eide on May 1lth that the county |
seat should be moved to a new site,
and everyone believes that this
should be done, the question of
new court house will naturally come
up. A new court house to cost
$40, 10000 could very easily be ac-
complisbed by bond issue for that
amount. bearing 5 per cent interest.
At 5 per cert the additional tax
would be 2 cents on $1OO.00, or 20
cents or $1.000.00. A property
holder assessed at $5,000.00 would |
pay $l.00 additional taxes. How
could such an amount be considered |
in view of the fact
that II the people should decide
against moving the county seat, it
would be absolutely necessary with.
in a short time to expend at least
S5 1000, perhaps more, to repair the
present court house, and before the
next period that an election could
be held, the people of the county
would have expended in expenses
For jurors and on their own account
by reason of having business at the
county seat. a sum of perhaps
$40, 100000, or more. During the 4,
waiting period for another election,
six years. about one-half the cost of
, new court house would be paid