The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1870-12-01

F., The report OF the State auditor, containing
many valuable suggestions. is as follows:
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, -
OFFICE OF AUDITOR OF STATE,
| COLUMBIA, S. c., November 81, 1870
To HIS Ercellency r. K. Scott, Governor orSou!h
GovERSoR-I have the honor herewith to trans
nit my.report, with accompanying exhibits, Tor
| the fiscal year 1869:
Exhibit An is an abstract OF the real property
OF the State, classified anu arranged by counties
| as returned by the county auditors and equ 81
ized by the state board OF equalization t0r 1858,
and revised by the county boards of equalization
| for 1862
property Of the State, showing the value OF each
class ofproperty in the several countless as re,
I.county boards Of equalization.
| Exhibit "C'' Is statement showing the value OF
railroad property placed upon the duplicate, also
| the amount assessed upon express and telegraph
companies In this State.
Exhibit "Dn is an abstract Of the aggregate
| quantity and value Of Ieal and personal property
on the duplicate, as turned over to the county
| treasurers, With Ihe amount OF. taxes charged
| thereon for State and county purposes.
Exhibit "E'' is statement arranged by coun-
ties, showing the total amount collected up 10 oc-
| tpber 3lst 1870 inclusive on account or poll-ta2
aud taxes for general purposes Of State govern
| ment for the fiscal year 1869.
Exhibit "F,' is statement showing the amount
collec 81 during the fiscal year ending october 81,
|
By reference to exhibit I'D" 1t Will be seen that
the total value OF the property on the dupllc cate
fur 1869 Is fifteen millions greater than Tor 1858.
This increase Is mainly attributable to the assess
ment Of the South Carolina, Northeastern, Cne.
| raw and Darlington, and Greenvie and Columbia
Railroads. There is however. slight incl ease IN
| other kinds Of personal property. From informa-
tion received at this Office 1t Is believed that the
assessment now being completed will show
very considerable increase In the aggregate value
| OF the property Of the State.
| The vast amount Of railroad property IN the
| State which has claimed exemption from taxa
| tiou has attracted the attention OF the present
administration, and In my report TO the
! last session OF the General Assembly, said
in reference to this question that "un-
| less the General Assembly decides otherwise
/ will feel compelled to insist upon the as
sessment OF the property OF such corporations.
and the collection Of the taxes levied thereon, IN
accordance with what believe to be the plain
| will in the matter by passing the act No. 2577,
which was intended to prevent the courts OF the
State from interfering 10 prevent the collection OF
taxes levied upon the railroads OF the State.
Upon notification, the oheraw and Darlington,
ana Northeastern Railroad Companies made the
return required BY law, but made 1t under pro-
test. as to their liability to taxation The South
Carolina Railroad Company neglected TO make
any return, though frequently notided OF the re.
quirements of the law. After considerable delay,
in order that the officers OF the company
might tx their own value upon lts pro
zation, from the best information at It's
command, fixed the value OF the road and Its ap-
purtenauceS. and the treasurers or the various
counties through which the roads pass were IN
strueted to proceed with the collection OF the
taxes levied upon them as In all other cases.
These corporations, with II view 10 avoid the taxes
thus levied, have procured suits to he brought
against themselves In the Circuit Court OF the
United States In order to obtain the Injunction OF
that court against the tax officers OF the state.
Preliminary injunctlons have been granted IN
each case by the Untel States circuit Judge. The
attorney general has appeared for the STATE Ia all
these suits, and has filed answers setting forth
the right or the State To impose the taxes In ques
tiun. The cases will be brought to argument dur
ing the present month.
upon the questions ,i law Involved In these cases,
cannot refrain from calling attention to certain
obvious reflections as To the interests OF the state
and the taxpayers generally involved In the decs-
ion to be rendered. There ls In round numbers, at
very low estimate. ten millions ofproperty In the
hands OF these corporations, claiming entire ex-
emptIon from taxation, either State. or municipal
AT the present rate OF State taxation, II these cor.
poratons paid their share OF taxes, those who now
pay taxes to the State would be relieved or the
burden Of taxation - the extent or $4,000 annu-
ally, and the taxpayers in the various counties
ueved or q proporI ionate burden. In the City OF
Charleston, the effect OF this exemption IS even
more disastrous than elsewhere That unfortu:
nate city Is struggling beneath load or debt and
taxation, which Is an almost insurmountable nh.
stacle In The way OF Its prosperity, and yet In the
hands Of TWO corporations there Is properly
which, II taxed equally with other property.
would paw onetenth OF the amount annually
raised by taxation. 1t should be borne In mind,
too that the evil Of this exemption from Taxation
is one that grows oy whst I u eSas aapno Un Rs is
roai Company owns much more real estate
III the City OF Charleston to-day than 1t did
two wears ago and there Is nothing, aside from
It's want Of liability and will to do so t. prevent IL
froxr obc6rh mOrn
property OF the city anu State, and tnus impose
heavier burdens upon other property holders.
know 1t Is thought by some OF those immeuiateiy
mnlsl ration Is In some way opposed to 1t. and de.
sirous Of Gripping its resources. Nothing could
be more upfuunded than such suspicion. am
glad 10 admit NIL that this corporation mas done
past, and all that 1t Is capable OF doing In the
future But it should be remembered that when
the State extended the privileges to this corpora
tion which 1t claims are perpetual, tne state was
abundanlly able To bear the burden. To-day there
is scarcely railroad corporation In the State that
is not better able to bear tile burdens OF taxation
than the other taxpayers are.
The inequitable character OF tnl9 claim 10 eN'
empyion rom taxation is SO manifest, that way
to aet It aside must be FOUND.
As matter immediately affecting the revenue
OF tile state feel 1t my duty to call attention 70
the loose manner in whi'h the financial analrS OF
many Of the counties are conducted. Ihe ACT
defining the jurisdiction and duties OF county
commissioners provides "that no lax snail Oe
levied and collected by the county commissioners
until the same has been authorized by the zen:
eral Assembly" The General Assembly, for the
fiscal years of 1865 and 1862 authorized the levy OF
certain taxes for county purposes. III some
cases. the amount authorized has not been su1l-
Client t0 meet the expenses or the county. LII
sume OF the counties the commissioners have
audited accounts and issued their cert11lcatts
largely In excess OF the amount authorized TO be
raised by taxation. 1t seems TO me that TINS ID
dangerous practice, and one which should be pro-
hlbitCd by legislation. III the county commission
ers are compelled to raise money in advance, or
in excess, OF The amount authorized to be raised
by taxation, they should be requi ed to do IL by
laws regularly made, and bearing fixed rate OF
interest. The present mode Of proceeding creates
dissatisfaction, anu brings reproach upon the al
miniStration or affairs, In tile several counties.
In those States where tile system OF taxation
and the county organizations which we have
adopted prevail, the county auditor Is e3-of1lclo
clerk TO the board or county commissioners
think our system would be Improved oy lne
adoption Of the same rule here. The county audi
tor In his official capacity acting as clerk to the
commissioners, could be made wholesome check
both upon the commissioners and the county
treasurer, by examining and cUuntersigning all
their orders upon the treasurer, and settling the
accounts OF the latter with the commissioners.
Act No. 191, passed at the last session, gives 10
assessors assigned to assessment districts OF
more than three miles square, four dollars per day
The practical operation Of this Is 10 give that
compensation to nearly all the ass ssors employ
ed, and thersby greatly increase the cost OF the
assessment
My judgment is that in almost all cases three
dollars per day is rs much as should be paid lor
the services rendered; and respectfully call al.
tenIion to the matter, aud recommend that II IL
Is thought best to discriminate IN favor OF any
assessors, the size OF the district III which In
creased compensation Is allowed should oe at
least six miles square.