Fayette County herald. [volume] (Washington [Washington Court House], Fayette County, O. [Ohio]) 1860-1???, 1867-05-16

ments calculated to, mislead thC
public mind and produce strife anG
= contentious injurious to the best in
terests Of the county.
The first sentence of the article
contains the basis upon which the
minds Of all persons directly inter
ested can harmoniously meet, to-
wit: "The great and vital point is
the equitable adjustment of the as
sessment on the lots and lands to
be benefited thereby"
n The law furnishes the basis upon
which that reputable adjustment"
' is to be made and the judgment Of
disinterested men must be relied up
on to give it force and carry it's
provisions into practical operation,
The assessors upon the Colum-
bus Road were Willis Hays, Jesse
Johnson and Henry Kirk, whose
reputation stands unimpeachable as
persons Of good common sense
and judgment, and where appoint
ment by the County Commissioners
to 50 delicate and responsible a |
task, was one emiReHtly "N 10 be !
made." To their report Of the as
sessment,no exceptions were taken,
and the Commissioners ofthe coun-
ty confirmed the same. Subsequent
ly assessors were appointed and
made an assessmant upon the town
of Washington for the improve
ment Of the Jacksonville road, and
those reports show about the same
assessment upon Washington, for
the improvement of each Of the
roads, as was made by the assess
ors on the Columbus road.
None Of these assessors were eli
ther residents Of Washington or in
terested in any real estate there.
The assessors upon the James
town road, without knowing how ,
or in what manner the assessors !
upon the Columbus road had arri- s
we'd at the result they had repor-
ted, went to work apon q basis Of !
their own, and when they got thro', S
they found that the aggregate Of |
assessment on the lots in town, l
was few dollars less than the a y
mount assessed for the Columbus =
road. The assessors were Humph-
rey IIidy, George S, Gillespie and I
George Stewart.
Your correspondent says that |
the town Of Washington is assess |
ed Sl,195,75, and then remarks,- {
"Can it be possible that the real !
estate Of Washington is not beno-
fited to II greater amount than the c
above, by the improvement Of the v
Columbus road, dc. ?' Admit for q
the sake Of the argument, that the n
town OF Washington is "bcneiitad n
to a greater amount than 81, ,l95,-
n, would he have the town assess I'll
I'd to the amount Of the benefits n
derived? ESQ, the assessors must p
lySt determin the dmOWnt of bcne- is
it the town will derive from the ii
Improvement, and assess it to that W
tmouRt even if that "am0Wat' m
should be the entire cost Of the i'm be
81
But the Jaw requires that the as tn
icssors shall apportioa the estima- pl
ed expense according to the bono- Ia
it each piece Of land shall derive bl
rom the improvements and not to W
ssess such lands to the "dm0Unt'
# the benefit derived. wi
He says again---"How, or in what re
manner the assessors could arrive &C
t those figures, is beyond the com gl
Of most Of your read II
rs" Is it possible! ! Ifit is "be- hi
opd The comprehension of most of ii,
our readers" of course, then, so pl
ar as those "readcrs' are concerned, tr
will be useless for me to show al
how or in what manner the asses SO
ors could arrive at those figures pl
ven though ] should demonstrate be
to the comprehension of every
ordinary mind, IS
apprchend it is wirul blindness pr
instead Of want Of comprehension, OK
hat those readers cannot see that it th
s an equitable adjustment Of the tn
OTIS in Washington, tn
When il is shown wAeretn the re- de
)ort OF these viewers is unjust or in
nequitoblc, itwiIIbc proper to show sh
how and in what manner the as be
icsors could arrive atthose figures lal
rhc assessors must beimpeachcd for dir
pad faith, or basis fixed upon of
which different result may be oh.
aimed, and the reasons 'chy SUch a on
aSis should be adopted. to
Again ho says that at is admit OF
ed by all who are competent to
i've an opinion on the subject, that tn
ccordmg to the law Of 1865, and tn
specially the law of 1867, the lands nc
or two miles on each side of the or
ontomplatcd Improvement, inclu- an
ing a radius Of two miles at the an
lrminus within the county, might lal
nd ought to be taxed for such i'm, pc