from Baltimore (Mr. Cushing) yesterday
that this system would not increase the taxa
tion for the support of schools in the State
Mr. CUSHING. My argument was that it
diminished it.
Mr, MILLER. I have taken pains to look a
the local laws of the several counties of the
State for the purpose of ascertaining whether
or not that assertion is true. It is conceded
that this section and the succeeding section
would authorize and require the levy of at
least twenty cents on the hundred dollars
State tax for the support of this system of
public schools. Now I find that in Balti-
more county the county commissioners of
the county are authorized to levy a tax not
exceeding eight cents on the hundred dollars ;
—twelve cents, I am informed. That would
be an increase for the county of Baltimore of
at least eight cents. In Allegany county I
find that the taxis not to exceed fifteen cents
on the hundred dollars, and the increase
would be at least five cents for that county.
In Calvert county it is ten cents on the hun-
dred dollars. Caroline is the only county
that I find among all the counties of the
State which comes anywhere near the pro-
posed taxation. It provides that the tax
shall not exceed twenty cents on the hundred
dollars. In Cecil it is twelve cents on the
hundred dollars.
Mr. PUGH. I do not know where the gen-
tleman gels his facts, but if he is as far off in
other counties as in the county of Cecil—
Mr. MILLER. I take them from the code of
local laws.
Mr. PUGH. Then they must have been
changed. I am sure that Cecil pays 20 cents
on the $100.
Mr. EARLE. It was increased last winter.
Mr. MILLER. In Frederick county, unless
there has been some change since the adoption
of the code, the provision is that the county
commissioners shall only levy the sum of
$5,000.
Mr. CUNNINGHAM (in his seat.) It is
$8,000.
Mr. MILLER (continuing)—to be paid to the
inspectors of primary schools of that county;
and if the board of inspectors so determine,
they may increase the sum to $8,000, or they
may at the discretion of said board of assess-
ment entirely omit said levy. According to
the present report, taking the assessment of
Frederick county at $21,929,182, the tax of
20 cents on the $100 would require the citi-
zens of Frederick county to raise an annual
tax of at least $45,000, where they raise a
tax now not exceeding $8,000.
In Dorchester county they are allowed ac-
cording to the local law as published in the
code, to levy a tax not exceeding; $4,000. In
Harford county, the provision in the code is
that it shall not exceed 12 cents on the $100.
In Worcester county, according to the pro-visions
of the code, there is no tax whatever |
levied by the county commissioners for the
support of common schools in that county,
and I am informed by the gentleman from
t Worcester (Mr. Purnell) that the large sum
of 20 cents on the $100 will be imposed upon
the people of the county who now pay noth-
ing. In Somerset county the code provides
that the tax shall not exceed 12 cents on the
$100.
1 find in the provisions of some of the
counties, Prince George's and Charles, for
instance, that they appropriate so much
money for the payment of primary school
teachers, $350 for instance, and authorize the
county commissioners to levy that amount.
It would be impossible to ascertain without
spending upon it more time than I have had
to devote to it, what the effect of this report
would be in those counties, whether it would
increase or diminish the tax. In Anne Arun-
del, the same provision is made as in Prince
George's, that "the county commissioners
shall levy upon the assessable property of the
said county such sum annually as shall divide
to each school district $300 independent of
the State fund, but shall not include district
number thirty-eight in such distribution."
1 suppose that the difference existing be-
tween the several counties arises to some el-
tent from the fact that there is a larger school
fund existing in some of the counties than in
other§ for the benefit of their primary or com-
mon schools.
1 take it that by the provisions of this re-
port the school funds of the several counties,
after the adoption of this system, will either
be taken from the counties and put into the
general school fund of the State, or that the
county authorities will have power to dispose
of them for such purposes as they see fit oth-
erwise than for that purpose. If it is applied
to the general school fund of the State
under this report, it seems to me that it will
Work great injustice to the several counties
which have more or less money invested in
the school fund. Take the county of Somer-
set, for instance.
Mr. CUSHING. Are the taxes in the coun-
ties obligatory or permitted ?
Mr. MILLER. Obligatory. Take the case
of Worcester county, where there is no tax
levied by the county commissioners at all.
Their primary schools are kept up in that
county now by a fund which belongs lo that
county; and they have got along under that
system without taxing the people of the
county at all for that purpose. Now the in-
justice is apparent of taking from that county
their present school fund and imposing upon
them a tan of 20 cents on the $100 for the
purpose of raising this money.
I have said this much in explanation of the
views which I expressed yesterday, and in
reply to the gentleman from Baltimore city
(Mr. Cushing,) who wished to create the impression
that bad not made a fair statement , |
