, 1876-02-02

IA not rendered inoptratvn by a error in tsa.s1ns
rans Of rrnrsEty, Or by thu omissions ot to Anss4
qu!rrd ly tho Constitution, she4e ts1es ~ unsfoEtn
Ths r1,,cuAon from all .l!A Il 1e.lshle. Tho s.r
snd ha. been Levied ana assessed sccotdnE 10 eItang
laws. This CITY has tho right to collect Its fescnu2
"es %s s ads; ';y Sy'ns 1Tn; 10 o
sidcred1s, Waa the property Of the complainant
TnAuDu1ESrIT AsaEsaEp
Il ss seatcaly tcetI hell by ths auprsmo Court Of
THU State. hnd Of Ill tle ialen, that court Of e1utJ
will not entertain bill 10 restrain tho collection of
ery sub}rct to tAsntlon, whtro this tak II n.l-
thuraed By law, or where e 7rncry has bcca fzaud-
Ths general rrluspse ia. heen snno,,ncod 70 fro.
only bI orr uwn burrcmo conrt. hat W 10 many
eeded. and henee sho eo,np:an.nt admia the ts1 10
s III IT,. Il es III Ii
wna tfsnsulsnty sss~sei at .oo h!gha r.!e. md It
menss rcei on by him 70 Hhow that tho property ia
tsaudulsn.ly ssses:ed too h!ga ste tat W. lFoMzy
Va, Tr Or sqS
o. That amoant. and that LIZ ras thu. induced t9
1i.rega.a te n.tto. e el.ns 10 rena e haze ~, asked
ttlan tioo0o. liz a,so e1.in,s I'm. tho Asses.or
other property WI sssesss II rats hsiow tbs vslua
tou Of the comIlatants property II is NOW asstfcd
tas! .no sos .Sa et.y g ana T I'M sW ;s tHo ~ Il s
whoso property Il on,itted. II esnnot 10 claimed
that simply emitting, without 50 iatsni,G, 70 nssss'
would rendcr tho correct a&scssnent q tho COMPLAIN.
Claimed 70 do 10 would bo to require tho AS essor
perfection tn the discharge Of his 0nes. 4 IL true
sa I'm. fna a
occur frequently In tho bill but ia not cioas that any
assessment, except those about tho vauc Of tho rop:
ota1 taA nj
ao As ssoT 10 x ho pe
stsaod inso charge Of arauduleat conduct on & shs
fhe Assoasor aud his Deputy do nut rcme'at,es the
faeta stated by the compananl They huth deny thst
aS Sy Sts aap M
definite terms, eaJ what hta properly s
900 or thnrestoulas and no mge Is not Tory deh1tte
Of tho Asse.sot nna hi4 Deputy. IL Is not cigar lint
very great injustice has eeu done 10 tho complainant
tia A.at.sor. and tho AFsersor IL required to z tho
valuation. Tho owner q the rrorcty nsy tasn r. r.
asssssaeat aud valuation. Tho citizen can thus, by
little caro- md pfecsutiun, avoid snch m!ftakcs and
Misunderstanding ~ thoso now be!ng considered. M
If In ila INSTANCE the complainant had dema,ded ss
statement, this conflict or difference In recollection
would Lave no ex!sttAra.
Opportunity to have tbs aasesamcns adjusted. Il il
moi admitted y to defendant that any notco to ta1-
Of ~ n q IT,
Of ths city md II IL aso shpwn that tho compainaus
a n1 sJaS esn 70 bo aen u proos h
owl interest II Ia e negligent tue cofta will not 10
III haste to supply to him What be has 1oat W LII
Where tho officer Eaakeb 40 assessment Of property
for taxation tie assessment II presumed to TO correct
and Judgments viii 10 upheld unless the saine II shown
to 10 tainted with fraud. which always rem
a .1s ns T e. Saaea4 SRs .na i saas.
courts do not scek to 1ud Obcctoua to assessments.
They seek to uphold them. They viii rather =, t.
most that can be required a TINT tho ooer acs ait7
and approximate correct valuations, and THUS comply
| with tho sptrt and intention Of tho RETrnno laws.
wich aro Intended to bo based upon thu PRINCIPLES o!
uniformity and equality. In 10 esent Will m tnjano-
10 1s hs,
Will sustain rreparabla injury l'lcss The COLLECTION oi
~ Il nav 10 vii 10 add to what has been eald TINT fht
rover and Of the eonstutious4ty Of tho Law cslAbis
lug tho
TuR BTArE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
nas he bed ts. ~ I'll Isslstnre was fuy .Ialsoi L
create tho Board. and to invest With simple power
eqnalizo the assessmenss OF, o dinoIent coahlast
In the 8tate. Not having made MI Arrangement Will
The Assessor to tho valuation Of sho rtoperty ant
having failed to require Of tho Assessor copy OF tn
cos1mittee Or M Board II either town o. county, III
complainant will not 10 allowed 70 complain of VIA
H.. ssa iossd f.i!s in ia deut snd institc la,
10 properly adjust aud equ1llzc tho tA!ct thruuglou
tho Hase Dut that Is only sIch mistake anu sue!
al error % must be endured for tho time, These mat
tcra have toen determined eEe rss aatn,ieats.
tiIup proceeding under both 1assa IT haa bccu proves
that the two modes Of collecting the city rcScne ox
ista and that tho law provides for certBn offices tia
may or may not be abolished. Untl abolished, ~
matter Of course. they must peEfottn Tho dates re
II this isaue be not conclusive, It y difficult % se
how this error u error II bs, can ytao the ehro a
It il. however, Ia s connection. insisted thas th
pn1t OF tho Appropriation ordinance Of the city a1
rropratln9 S5,Ol for Tag Commissioners and Assesl
on wan unauthorized, and that lts enaetulcnt cor
npctes1 with oher matters avowtd In tho bill. c0u
Lucd and rendered fraudulent tho tax assessment.
aucient reply to stIs proposition ia that IT has cve
lxe held ttt tho K-psyer may at any ttne have MI
municipal corporation ento!nea from useless md @ u!
prevent such wrongful expenditures dlrect proceet
inga ,,at be Instituted. It cannot bo donc BY an
collateral prooeodnRa 1t eaunot ho thrown In a. =
additional ground or reason for seeomplshinK sou
other end. This is principle 50 familiar TINT iha II
thorttcs eed not lo citcl TO sustain 1t.
. fur thaae and ether rcaaons which nned not now
stated tho request Of the complainant for An injun
. | ton IL 1ptliel,