The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1878-04-10

have got lost cleaning out his office for
the business of 1877. He last saw the
data when he made MS settlement, to-wit;
October, 1877.
Hints OF negligence, or something
worse, have been made in the newspapers
against Mr.. Black since Smith x Co.'S
petition was filed. He comes out in cards
announcing that his business with the
city is before committee. How much
of tins business was before the committee,
this Council knows. We 60 before that
committee. There Is hr. Blsck declared
to be "sz otfcio" and found to be de facto
q member of that committee. Alter
much business is dispatched, we come 10
Smith " Co.'S petition. De reads the
petition and reads his communication,
and then admits that he has now learned
that the addition of two hundred
dollars by him is illegal, but claims
that 1t WAS done in pursuance OF an
arrangement with the committee, and
in accordance with custom, and closes
with a statement of the enormous
amount of water used by Smith 81 Co.
The Committee ignore the $500 added
by the Collector, and thinking the S75
assessed by Council is not too much, re-
solve to recommend the rejection Of
Smith u Co.'S petition. TINS would, on
the records, be whitewssk not contem-
plated by the committee, and believe it
is now intended to report a resolution
better adapted to the facts.
l feel it my duty to disclose TO this
Council the facts with reference
to the case of Lewis u WoOdmansee,
whose petition for reduction OF water
tax, was by Council referred 10 the COm-
mittee on Water Works along with
Smith * Co.'S, petition. If l knew all
the crOokedness to be found IL or about
the Collectors office, might cite case
of better pecunisry success, but l doubt
if case could be found that is more bold
in conception or more mastery in exc
cution.
The Grant House was burned March
3)th, 1877. Messrs. Lewis & Woodman-
see propretors, soon established busI-
ness in an sdjourning and much
smaller building. On or about
February 25th, 1878, they
came to pay their taxes for 1917 and
found that their water tax was $3.50.
Mr.. WoOdmsnsee Instantly and un-
mpromisIngly protested, but the col
lector's duty was plain. DE must collect
the amount OF the assessment or they
must get reduction. He sympathIzed
with them. lie thought too, that 1t WAS
an outrage. He would aid them. He
would write the petition for them and
see it through. He did write 1t in the
words and figures following, tO-wit;
WHEELING, February %, 1878.
To the Honorable Mayor and CITY Council.
GENTLEMEN-Yourp petitioners would
respectfully represent to your honorable
body that the water rent assessed against
them as proprietors fthe Grant House
tor the year 1917, Is the same as that as
sesscd previous TO the burning OF their
hotel, Wis: $3.50. That in consequence OF
their present establishment being much
smaller and consuming less water thaa
the Old hotel, they deem the amount so
assessed as excessive and onerOus, and
therefore pray your honorabiy BODY for
such reduction MS msy seem reasonable
and just, and your petitioners Will ever
pray, SC. LEWIS " WOoDMANsEE.
They signed 1t and he took charge Of
it. Tie Council, rs l have stated, re-
ferred it to the Committee on Water
Works. Being attorney for Smith y Co,
1 appeared before the committee. The
committee (incited now TO unusual vigil
lsncel demanded 10 have the assessment
book before them and sec the record OF
each case presented. Knowing that Lewis
tS Woodmsnsee's assessment on the books
was but twenty-tour dollars, l watched
to see how the danger point was to be
passed. The petition was read. Mr..
Black made his brlet statement, in which
he alluded to some oversight, or clerical
error, or something OF the kIndi spoke OF
the fire, and l don't remember OF what
else, but by happy turn-an evolution
OF the most perfect kind
brought the committee to the
serious consideration of the question
whether Lewis Il Woodmsnsee should
have reduction from $24. They were
unanimously of the opinion that the
tax was, If wrong in any respect, slresdy
too low. and that 1t WAS unnecessary TO
trouble Council with the matter. They
therefore laid the petition on the table
their table.
| do not presume to say what MIR.
Black would have done if the committee
had not demanded to have the assess
ment book before them, but in order TO
suggest q field for inquiry in the lnvesu-
gsliCn which l hope and trust Will
be made, will state what
seems to me the natural course
with such a petition under ordinary cir
cuUstanCes,
If perchsnce the question should be
mooted in the Committee as to who as
sessed such an enormous water tax, the
Assessor, if present, might say ne did not
do it, it must have been the Council. II
anybody should say il was not the Coun-
Gil, it would probably be called q clerical
error of somebody, and the amount OF
their assessment would not be doubted.
More probably no question would be
asked as to who did it, but the Commit
Tee would inquire into the fairness o; the
assessment, and would recommend re-
duction from $3.50, to $50 or S15.
On the coming in of the report, the
Council would adopt 3 resolution reduc.
isr Lewis Il Woodmsnsees water tax
from $3.50 TO SIS. Lewis & Wootmsn.
see would pay Mr.. Black SO, with thanks
for bis kindness, while he would be still
charged in the assessment book with but
S34 on their account, and he would get
hIs commissions" on the whole $3.50.
But let US inquire little further to see
Whist these commissions would natur-
allv be. When the Collector makes his
snnusl settlement he is of curse charged
with the aggregate Of the assessments
actually appearing on the assessment
book, and is credited with suy reduc-
tiors therelrom by order Of Council. In
every annual settlement there will be
found to the Collectors credit amounts
set opposite Double Assessments" "Er-
roneous Assessment" and reductions
by Council" 1t would be bsd book
keeping that would not give him credit
for the whole amount TO which he is en-
< 4 D. IV1.,-. Ill