New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1874-03-04

believing that such al understanding existed, snd
declined to he pressed further upon matters which
did not concern himself IL will be seen hereafter
that this reply of the collectors dsiBgenuOus,
and showed want of candor. to say the least. In
view of the fact that thore long and exhaust
lists Of estates. from which such taxes were DUE in
their hands and in the hands of their deputies in
process Of collection. Mr.. McMichael continued:
Before and after received these letters was re-
quested by Mr. John f. BesterlnR, accountant, who
the local agent Sinborn in city 10 proceed
with tho collections. and he gave me list OF nine
one, which the would have been from 10000 to
$4,000 sent out notices TO these estates, requesting
their representatives 10 settle taxes which appeared 10
be unpaid had spoken to Mr.. Tutten the Supervisor
Of this district. whom you know to be mao OF ire
taxes aud after had received those letters Of the
Collector. had another conversation with Mr.. Tutten.
Mr.. McMichaels further statement was to the
effect that under tho old system OF collecting the
legacy and succession taxes the act for which was
repealed in 1870 and the Office of thereby
abolished, the assessor kept book containing
a list OF all persons who died leaving estates
This book fell Sinto the hands OF Mr. Tutten, the
Supervisor some two years ago, and he had sent
list of claims in each district to the Collector
thereof. These lists covered all such taxes out
standing and yet although these lists were in the
hands of these Collectors they did not report them
gentleman, learning of the existence OF the
lists required the collectors IT, furnish him copy Of
them. Only yesterday did the first of these Col
lectOrs, Mr.. Elliott, comply. A copy OF these
lists, containing 80 names, was shown, but tho
amounts assessed did not appear. Elliott says
that many of these claims are still In the
hands of his deputies. IL is believed that ths
eight or ten estates furnished by Mr.. Belsterling
to Mr. McMichae for collection will DO found TO APP
however, to say that Mr.. McMicbael was not aware
OF the presence OF any claims III tho hands Of the
revenue officers of the Government until atter he
had sent ont the notices referred to among the claims
placed in his hands by Mr.. Belstering.
Beside Belsterling az local agent, Mr. Barrows
appeared the the travelling agent Of San
born. He urged Mr.. McMichael TO proceed with tho
claims IntlfQatp1
obstructing such collection by requiring direct in
structions from the Treasury Department.
by writing TO the Collectors for the
claims of record in their offices, and by
declining to mako any collection upon being in
formed of the existence of the lists furnished by
Mr. Tutten. SO far M the fee Of five per cent Il
conccrned-aud it WAS here that Mr.. McMichael
evinced annoyanceas the legal fee 10 United States
DisrictAttorney in ordinary cases Is only two per
himself by telling Mr.. Barrows and Mr.. Belsterhng
that as he would have TO give his receipt officially
for these taxes when collected, he should have
receipt directly from the Treasury.
This receipt should contain . statement OF the
amount of this commission. that his whole none
tary transaction should be directly with tho Treas
ury and not with Mr. SaDbOn. Mr. Burrows replied
that he could see objection if such plan could be
adopted in the accounting system Of the treasury.
Mr. McMiohael states that he was thus
scrupulously careful in his transactions
with these people for tho that the great dan
ger to be avoided was the collection of taxes and
payment of largo percentage for such collection.
when the taxes were within the knowledge of the
regular officers of the Government In etter dated
February 8. TO Solicitor Baniied, forwarding copies
OF tho correspondence referred to. he so stated