Daily Republican., 1880-09-30
!. =. ar.x ana ,he A.sessmenss.

:. six Of the act passed April 9Th, 1873
II; was unlawful for the Levy Court u
It.ke from the assessment returned 4
Itie Levy Court. the name OF any persor
Iapp ,sripg thereon whether legal or IL
egally assessed. The section which
as deemed su6icient and conclusive
enough to prevent the Levy Cour'
f;om purging the list Of some 400 OIL
$500 names which had been illegally as
sessed, reads as follows: "t shsll moi
be lawful for the Levy Court or any
lmember thereof, To take from the as
Issssment returned TO the said Levy
Court BY any assessor, the name Of any
lpsrson appearing therein or to add to
Iauy assessment returned as aforesaid
tas name Of any person unless upon
the personal application Of such person
and upon proof ofhis right 70 be assess
ssd as required to be furnished to ~
assessor by section two Of the aot."
II will RE remembered that the VII
u uington Assessors at the extra assess
Imsut last winter assessed the names OF
Those Who had been returned as delin,
lquents at tho March previous though
the law explicitly provided that such
names could not be put on the assess
nisnt again until one year had expired
from the day they had been allowed as
ieliIquents. These names were all un
lawfully and we have reason TO believe
willfully assessed and returned to the
Levy Court as part Of the regular
assessment by the assessors.
The attention Of the court was called
TO this outrageous fraud time after
time by the Republican press as well
as by private citizens and committees
from the leading business men Of Wi u
mington. To every plea for justice the
Levy Court referred to section six
which they construed into prohibi-
tiou enactment forbidding them either
TO take from or add to the assessment
returned. 1t was quite likely true
that hundreds of men had been illegal
ly ass sssd by the assessors, argued
the members Of the Court, but what il
they are we cant help it. There is the
law which explicitly forbids us from
interfering in the matter. The last
appeal maze to the Levy Court to have
them purge their record Of fraudu lent
assessments, was made by q committee
Of legal gentlemen headed by Anthony
Higgins, Bsq. In representing the
case Mr.. Higgins presented q list OF
over 400 names Of dslinquents that
were upon the assessment that had no
right to be there, and he also called
the attention o. the Court 10 the de.
cision Of their own Attorney George
Gray, B'q., made in March, 1876, when
his written decision was read TO the
Court instructing them that they had not
only perfect right 10 purge their lists
of illegal assessments but that they Yio-
lated the law II they did not do 60.
We would in ro envious spirit i'm
pute partisan motives to Mr.. Gray, but
would mere ly remind our readers that
n 1876 the Republicans were supposed
o have more men assessed than they |
Tere legally entitled to, but In 1880 4
here ia no mistake that the Democrats o
comprise the great bulk Of illegal as T.
Mr.. Gray, we are informed, d
onsiders the sixth section, which We C
lavs read, a complete bar to any inter Il
erence whatever with the assessments, !,
xcept so far as to correct clerical errors,
md though there may be all the illegal n
assessments on ths duplicates com.
'lained Of, yet the Court cannot go be- =
lind the assessment. Mr.. Gray ia one
VI the sblest lawyers in the State, and t
ar be it from us to insinuat even that
le has different decisions to suit differ
mt circumstances. Bearing this in u
mind it seems almost incomprehensible
hat Mr.. Gray should have delivered a
opinion in 1875, which we '
,rint in full in another column Of this
,aper. We venture to say that it will n
70 read with q considerable degree Of