OCR Text |
Show THE COU.NTV ASSESSOR SPEAKS. diiorl)cxrtt JWirs: In your iuo of June T, ISM, you, in an editorial, make It appear that the assessor 0f this county ha gonelieyotid reason in the valuation valua-tion of property. You say that the valuations are-excessive, that there is uo stilstanti.il reason for It, a plain and rational Interpretation or the revenue law does not Justify it, the effect ill be bad, etc As to the eflett or thu oratlon of the law I am uot responsible Sit. but tor the valuation or the property I am, and kuow that the proicrtv is not valued beyond lis market value. The projierty throughout the Territory Terri-tory lias been, I believe, put up as a rule from 100 to 5uO er eeut The aisessora would unanimously have voted against this measure, but be-in be-in controlled by the lans of the Uud, were coniiel!e-d to submit and Iierfurm the duties imposed upon them by the follow iug provision of law: "cc 7. That a Lewtection, numbered num-bered 2U26, is hereby enaetul as follows: SuiUc. Tho" assessor aud his sureties siiall be liable oil his official bonds for all taxes on projrtj within or known to the assessor as-sessor to lw assessable within the couuty, which through his wilful failure or neglcet is unasseiM-d, or which has by him been assessed at lets than the cash value." It is and has been known that the property of this county his not been valued by the assessor at more than 00 per cent, of Its vnlue liefiire this J ear. Although our law provided that tho property should be valu. d at a fair cash value, the nsse-s-ors thought they had some discretion In the matter, and to used it and publicly pub-licly published tint at a nieetlnirof the assessors of the Territory it was agreed to-value all proirty at M Iier cent or its value. But the legislature thought best to reduce the rate or tax and increase the valuations to a cash value, aud provided that ir tlio assessor did not atsess property at a cash value, the couuty attorneys should commem-e a suit against the assessor and his bondsmen for the recovery of the revenue lost through his (the asscs-wr'-) neglect to assess at a full cash value. Now, Mr. Editor, I challenge you or any one ele to olntouta single instance where property Is assessed at more than ls market - -, ...,h (.nun, ui jur more than It could have been sold for on January 1, 1C91 as the law says all irurty shall be attested as valued on tile firt day of January. You say "A plain and rational interpretation interpret-ation of the revenue law dots uot justify thu placing of the proity at a cash valuation." If it does not mean this why does it provide a penalty, if the measure is not carried out. I do not wish to lie helJ responsible for the blunders of other people and in order thai I might escape being an instrument in the hands of the law to rob the jieople, I tendered my resignation to the county court, setting forth ray reasons and the hardiblps that would necessarllv follow through the operation of t he-law, he-law, but as tome one had to do the work the court informed me that they would bold me on my bonds Tor the return or tho assessment tjII", and In irrormIng this work I havo only done my duty and placed mjeelf and my bondsmen bevond the reach of the law. Jt&n W. Fo.x, Jk County Assessor. .r?LT AsAlCE Citv. June 2Sth, |