The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1869-12-27

fact that the same system has been successful
elsewhere is certainly some proof that when prop
erly enforced 1t may be equally successful here.
II certainly is not the part or wisdom to make
any radical changes in she act at the present
tine. There are some matters OF detail, such as
errors in dates, which require to be rearranged.
Such amendments as experience has shown to be
necessary, will be prepared for the consideration
Of the General Assembly.
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. SALES.
The Auditor is in favor OF eXempting from taX-
alton for limited time all property connected with
woollen or cotton manufactures except real es-
tate, but doubts whether "under our constitu-
tion" the exemption can'be granted.
The petition of merchants for relief from the
payment OF the tax on stocks or 1865, is brought
to the attention OF the Legislature, without the eX-
preston Of favorable or un1avorable opinion.
A resassessment OF the property OF Beaufort
County has been ordered, the records having been
burned. Fire-proof safes for the county commits
sonerS are recommended
TAxISG RAILROADS.
The Auditor says:
Section ., of Article XII, OF the constitution,
reads as follows:
sThe property Of corporations now existing, or
hereinafter created shall be subject to taxation,
except in cases otherwise provided Tor In their
constitution"
The Tax act Of 1885, in pursuance Of this pro-
vision OF the constitution, preScrlbes the moue IN
which railroad corporations shall make returns
OF the value OF their property, and makes no en-
ception in favor OF any company In the state. In
accordance with what believe to be my duty,
furnished the necessary blanks to, ana notlneu
the different railroad companies, that return Oh
the value Of their respective roads and appur-
tenances must be made according to law. Inc
South Carolina Railroad Company declined max
ing return, claiming exemption from taxation
under its charter. The Northeastern, Cheraw
and Darlington, and Greenvillc and Columbia
companies made the returns required Dut usder
protest as to their liability TO taxation.
was advised that the tax could not he enIorc-
ed against these companies, because their char-
ters exempted them from taxation IN TINS Staie.
This advice, coupled with the ineXpediency ol IN
voying the State in litigation at that time IN
duced me to forego my own Judgment IN the NAT
ter, and consequently the property or these cor
poratlons was not placed upon the duplicate ior
the year 1885, The question OF eXpedlency REFER
red TO may be stated thus: 1t was matter ol the
first Importance that the whole amount 0l money
appropriated by the Legislature should be collect
ed promptly. Now If the property OF thesc cor
porations, amounting in the aggregate proDauly
TO twelve or fifteen millions OF dollars, had been
placed upon the duplicate, it would nave lncreas-
cd the apparent basis Of taxation; but in case OF
would have been dcaciency in the Immediate
receipts at the treasury proportioned TO the
amount levied upon said corporations, anu 70 the
lower per centum OF taxation consequent upon
the apparent increased basis of taxation.
These are some Of the reasons which induced
me to waive for the time what have always be-
lieved to be the undoubted right OF the State ID
this matter. think that the State Is now III q
condition 10 insist upon her rights in this regard,
and have, therefore. concluded that II Is my duty
to place upon the duplicate the property OF all the
railroad companies Still claiming exemption from
taxation. The claim, OF course, Is that tne con-
stitutiOna provision before cited is in violation OF
the Constitution The United States, inasmuch
as It Is (alleged to bel violation OF tile contract
existing between the State and these corpora
tions. This Is a very broad question, ana one
tvh NJ COmDetoQt
and If these corporations prefer going into the
courts to paying the tax levied by tho -tatet
seems TO me they ought to have the opportunity
TO do so.
Unless the ;eneral Assembly decides otherwise
l will feel compelled 10 Insist upon the assess
ment OF the property OF such corporations, ana
the collection of the taxes levied thereon, Ill ac-
cordance with what believe to 6e the plain law
OF tle case.
More pay is recommended for the treasurcrs OF
Charleston and Rlchand, and it is advised that
the State Auditor be given power TO remit penal
ties which have attached, under the law, upon
property held by assignees in bankruptcy, as well
as in cases where. in the settlement OF ei'ates
sales have been ordered by the courts, but have
not taken place in season to meet the taxes due
upon the property.
STUMBLING BLOCKS.
The arbitrary system OF valuation TO use the
has been costautly In od way In carrying out the
new sytem. Many citizens, not heretofore re-
quired to make sworn return OF personal prop
erty, look upon the acquisitions OF the act IN thls
particular Us subecting them TO system OF eSpl-
onage annoying in the extreme; and doubtless
the manner in which some assessors have per-
formed their duty has tended TO increase rather
than diminish this feeling. SO with regard TO the
valuation Of real property. The taxpayer anu the
assessor both had constantly before their minds
the old valuation and when called upon 10 fix the
value oflands formerly assessed, say at 20 cents
per acre, they would rest satisfied after they had
raised II to so cents per acre, thinking, doubtless
that they had performed their whole duty under
the law, or in many cases probably not thinking
at all.
These, briefly stated, are some OF the difficulties
under which the assessment was begun, and-ai-
ter considerable delay accomplished. In most or
the counties OF the State the county boards el
capitalization failed TO perform the duties I'M
posed Upon them by law This failure, IN c0nnec-
ton with the imperfect work Of the assessors, re-
suited In the return TO this office OF the real anu
personal property OF the State At the following
valuations:
Real property .Slo,l2o,V.l
Total S114, ,956, ,467
1t is generally admitted believe, even by those
most opposed TO the present government, that the
real and personal property OF the State would be
estimated below their true value at 500, 600 00O
THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION.
Tho Estate Board Of Equalization was called
together and found the property returned as
above stated. The duty imposed upon that board
by the law is as clear and explicit as any other
duty under It. That duty was to raise the real
property OF the several counties TO what they be-
lieved to be its true value; this they did.
IL has been asserted that the increase was mace
in order TO raise the amount OF revenue neeueu
by the State. Such is not the case; the revenue
could have been raised as readily by increasing
the Der centum OF taxation, and the clam0rS
which would have ensued in that event from those
who were determined to obStruct the government
under any and all circumstances, would nave
been no greater or less easily borne than that
which followed the other course. The State Board
was perfecty aware Of the fact that this increase
would bear hardly on some individuals, and hence
felt the responsibility resting upon them but
they were also aware that If no increase was
made in the valuation an Increase would nave 10
be made in the per ccntum or taxation, anu that
that would not only be oppressive upon lndlfld-
uals. but upon whole counties as compared with
board is monstrous anomaly, and that 1t ought
not 20 be permitted to exist.
Similar boards exist in all Of the states where
this system of taxation prevails, and III their
operation are found to be admirable incentives
toward securing fair and equal assessments Ill
the various local communities. The people OF the
different counties of this State Will see to 1t in
any future assessment Of their real property that
very little work shall be left for the State Board OF
Equaizati0n
DEFENDING THE SYSTEM.
The peculiar circumstances surrounding our
government Justify me i'll departing from the
usual course observed in report OF this kind To
notice some Of the criticisms that have been made