Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1922-10-04
Suggrsts n GusuIinc rnN.

!
bly, l have read with much interest
the editorials in your valued paper
on the subject OF state bond issue
| for roads.
AS member Of the House OF Dele
| gates from Brunswick County. l OPP
| posed tho issuance of bonds by the
| state for public road improvcmc ut
at the last session OF the Leg stature
| for the reason that | feared that the
| land tax would necessarily have 10
| be materially increased in order to
| take care OF the Interest on the
| bonds aud To create u sinking fund
| for their retirement. and knew
| that in a great many sections Of the
| state taxes were SO high as to oc-
| Casion great burden upon the pco-
pie.
! The proponents OF tho State bond
| Issue for roads were OF opinion that
| a. tax upon gasoline would bc suf
| ilc!cnt 10 pay the interest and r"tifc
! the bonds: but their ideas were in
| corporatcd IN two separate bills. ono
authorizing the ISSUANCE OF the bonds
| and the other placing a tax upon
gasoline The difficulty In the sit
uatlon was this: That once the state
! had sold bonds for public road I'm
provemcnt this Indebtedness would
continue until the bonds had been
retired, hut any subsequent LeSisla
turo could easily repeal the tax upon
gasoline with the necessary result
that the bonded Indebtedness would
have 10 be met by som" other form
OF taxation. Ultimately this burden
would have fallen upon the land.
1t goes without saying that the
state Of Virginia needs good roads,
and that II is 10 great extent lag
sinE behind other states in progress
In this direction. am convinced,
however. that the farming interests
OF the state upon which the recent
dc:lh;ior has placed it's greatest bur
d"uS are unwilling TO authorize amy
scheme OF extensive road building
Ey the state which might result IL
Il greater tax upon land than Is now
Imposed.
AS a member Of the Leg islature,
shall certainly not vote to Great"
any Indebtedness that viii occasion
an imcrcase IN taxes.
by acts Of Is Legislature and after
many hearings h"fUr" tho state
Highway Commission, tho state has
now laid out II system OF highways.
and the rcsul; OF the location OF
these highways has been accepted by
tho people OF the state as III" best
solution Of the difficult problem of
building such highways 50 as To con-
fer the greatest good upon the great
est number
While not committing myself IN
any manner TO tn" suggestion con
tatned in this letter I am writing
10 outline "A plan which | believe
would remove many OF the ohjcc-
lions 10 the proposed stat. bond is
sue for roads and which would AS
sure the people Of the state tina; the
issuance O: the bonds would not re-,
suit in increased taxation.
My suggestion briefly is this: That
in the bill authorizing the issuance
Of stat" bonds for public road i'm
prov"m.nt there he incorporated a
provision that the payment OF the
intcrcS, on the bonds and tn" Crca-
ti"n OF sinking fund for their re-
tiromcut hc provided for hy Il tax
upon gasoline or other motive fuel,
and that the funds derived from the
sale OF the bonds be expended upon
the roads OF the state highway sys-
tom as At presen; located.
By Incorporating III. gasoline tax
provision in the t"nd issue bill. and
making the gasoline tax a fund ont
Of which the principal and intercs;
OF the bonds shall b. paid. the OBJ
lection 10 the bond issue that taxes
would hc Increased would be re-
moved; and hy Incorporating In the
h!ll the provision that the funds de
rived from the sale Of the bonds
shall bc expended on the present
system Of highways there would be
up rcopcning OF this troublesome
question.
! do not believe that tho market
ability or tho validity OF state bonds
issued under such circumstances as
have outlined would bc affected.
for IN" reason that the gasoline tax
provision OF the bill would not be
IA condition attached 20 IN. issuance
az thu bonds. hut would he simply
SQUIRE" OF revenue for their pay
mcnt. OF course, the bonds would be
state otliratic:S and should the
source o: revenue for payment % the
bonds fail. The State would 10 com
PEELED to provide other means for
their retirement; but believe that q
bin can be so carefully drafted and
safcEua!d"6 and estimates can he 80
carefully made as TO the revenue
from gasoline or other motive power.
that such contingency would never
arise.
The result Of this plan would he
chat the Statc could proceed to build
its highways and compel the large
army oi lin can tourists who mi
CRATE scmiannua!ly across the State
and do great deal towards tear
ing mp our roads To pay for Il part
at least of the dHmare they cause.
Others using our roads would like
WIS" toe compelled to pay for thciT
use Of them. The farmers Of the
state would pay no increased taxes
except perhaps. AN Indirect tax On
the gasoline they consume. In other
States sucn a tax. under a proper
system OF inspection. has resulted in
a better grade or gasoline Being sold
ana the tax has been absorbed by
tie oil companies.
/ have discussed the above plan
with people in every walk of life in
the state. and have we, to hear
Of single objection to ii. Every
one wants good roads and every one
believes in the gasoline tax. What
we do need is To assure the farmers
OF the State that their tax account
will not he larger after the State
highway system is completed than IL
now is. AS one banker with whom
discussed this question few days
ago rcniarkcd "lf we can do that,
everybody will win"
As ] stated at the outset. ] am not
committed to this plan. hut would
like to have IL considered and dis
cusscd. as believe 1t offers pcac-
Teal solution Of the question that is
now confronting the state.
MARVIN SMITiIES.
I.awrcnccvillc, Va. october g. 1922.