Clearfield Republican. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1851-1937, 1875-02-10


CLEARFIELD, Pa,
WEDNESDAY MORNING, FEB. 10, 1878.
THE SYSTEM OF COLLECTING
TAXES.
An effort is being made before the
Legislature TO have our present mode
Of collecting county and State taxes
changed. The reader is no doubt aware
that there are two systems in vogue in
this State for gathering those taxes.
The old plan was for the Assessor to
return the names of two responsible
men to the Commissioners, one ofwhom
was made collector He collected the
taxes and was allowed .fre per cent
Hence, if the collectors collected and
paid into tho county Treasury s15, 900,
it cost the taxpayers $3.50. Under the
nc,o plan the county Treasurer collects
what he can and is allowed tloo per
cent, costing the taxpayers but 5000
for gathering similar sum into the
Treasury. This is therefore sapinq
of $3.50 on $4,000, and when the sum
reaches 10000, makes 5000, 1.-THE tax
of two or three small townships). in
favor of the taxpayers. The objector
will say that in large county like
ours, where the Treasurer is required
to do much travelling and collect but
little, 1t is unfair as the amount receiv-
ed does not cover expense. This may
be true; but our reply to that argu-
ment is That no man is compelled to
serpe as County Treasurer, and any one
can therefore avoid that annoyance.
Again; Under our system the tax
payer who comes forward in May or
June, and settles his taxes promptly,
gets discount of per cent, while the
delinquent is compelled to pay the
Constable 5 per cent. for running after
him in October and November.
This feature itself is very commend
able, because the State authorities there
by teach the citizen valuable lesson
that Of promptness, for which he is
paid-and if he wants somebody else
to wait upon him, he must pay the bill
himself and not call upon his prompt
tax paying neighbor to help pay his
bill, as was the ease under the old sys-
TEN, under which il MAIDEN difference
how early in the season he paid his
tax, he got no credit for being prompt,
The man who paid his tax in Novem-
ber Jared just as well as the one who
paid his in May. In fact, the system
was premium on delay and slothful-
ness.
1t is true that under the old law
counties were allowed per cent. on
the State tar, if paid into the State
Treasury by the first of August
Shrewd collectors came forward and
paid of their duplicates and received
the discount. This, too, was fraud
because the discount ras ailo,oed the col
lector and not the tar payer.
Another virtue, which should not be
overlooked, is that under the "Venan-
20 system, as it is generally known
to Legislators, far better class OF men
are elected to the Office of Constable,
in counties where the law has been
tested for fifteen or twenty years. This
is certainly commendable, as is every
other Act of Assembly which tends to
reduce the burthen Of the people and
elevate the standard and responsibility
of the officers who execute it.
Again, TO be still more practical, in
stead of theorizing, we will state 1t in
this way: For several years past the
county and State tax assessed in this
county has been, in round numbers,
about s26, 900, about half of which was
collected by the Treasurer and the
other half by the Constables. The
former charged but $500 to gather his
half into the treasury, while the dolin-
queatS were required to pay the officer
$3.50 for gathering up his portion. 1t
would therefore cost the taxpayers
only $500 to ocolect $4,000, ifall would
pay promptly that 'ehieh must be paid
dayhop, while under the old system it
would cost 81, 800, beside loss of $3.50
in discount, making a substantial diff
ference ofnot less than 81 ,430-cnough
to purchase good house and lot every
year.
We are aware that both systems
contain some Objectionable features,
but they cannot be cured by legislation.
Either system is good enough, if the
officers whose duty it is to enforce
them discharge their obligations to the
public. The radical wrongs and de
iects in both systems is no fault Of the
law, bat are brought about by the ne
glect, either through ignorance or de-
sign, Of the officers acting under them,
and must be remedied at homo and not
before the Legislature.
To conclude: We have personally
tested both systems. In point Of econ
omy the Venango law is far the cheap
est for the people, although rather
burthensomc on the Treasurer in a
county sparscly settled and of large
territory like ours But, as before
stated, this is penalty no man need
incur. Were we rs strong an advo-
cate OF "rings" us some people profess
to be, We would prefer the old plan.
Under il the Commissioners can ap-
point certain individuals as collectors,
without consulting the people, and give
them all the benefit of discounts and
profits that could be made under n
ragged system, and they can torn n