The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1880-01-24

an find nothing in the late law to
conflict Herewith, unless the v4luing
OF property IS owned and assessed oa
the Let day OF April can be so con.
strued.
l also call your attention to the
to tie revsnue act of 1878. page II,
section ], in which it is directed to be
assessed and collected annnslly, be.
ginning with the year 1878" etc.
Now. al will admit that January 1st
is tie frat of the year, instead of
April 1st, and if the assessors In 1878
could begin their assessment with the
beginning of the year, so they can in
1879 or Until taid section 10 repealed.
l argue that, taking the whole act
of 1873, the assessors Gao assess
property before April let, provided
sad property is valued in the assess
melt roll at its cash value on April
Isl. l also argue that if section can
be construed 70 mean that the ssses-
sors have no right to assess property
before the 1st day OF April. 1t can he
just as easily constru Il to mean that
no assessment can be made alter said
day, and lie just as explicit one way as
the other, as the short clause in Eaid
section uses the word "o2," and it is
on the strength of that little word on"
that some parties refuse to pay taxes |
il assessed before said day, bat they |
might with the same proprieiy, and |
on as good grounds say that they will
not pay taxes that are assessed after
said day.
II the Legislature at its present seq
sion would take this matter under sd-
visement, and insert in section l of
the Revenue Act an amendment,
fixing a certain day on which the
annual assessment is to commence,
it would be a great boon to the asses
sor's, and save great amount OF
and probably a few law.
suits, as there are some persons who
say they will stand suit before they
will pay taxes assessed on their pro-
petty before April let.
There is another item in connection
with this April 1st argument. OF
which l will say few words. If no
can be made before taid
day, then the act OF 1873, in relation
to "Trans;tory Herds" (page 40,
Acts of 1879 conflicts Herewith, and
may as we'll be repealed. Now, If l
can reRd said act correctly land, Of
l think 1 CAM the taxes on
such herds must be paid in the
county where such herds are wintered,
and one half OF the county tsxes 60
collected latter deducting the asses
sor's percentsge) must be sent to the
county where such herd is summered.
will mention case in this county.
For the past two years, (1S7S and
1879 large sheep herd is driven
into this county, (some time during
the month Of November, Of each year,
and wintered on a stream called Price
river ION FIoiseth's map of Utah) be-
low the south fork of said stream.
About the fret OF April Tor the last
days of March) said sheep are moved
up on to some small branches of said
river, running in from the north, and
also come of them are driven up to-
wards the head of said Price river.
Soon after their removal, as stated,
the assessor DIV agatch county assesses
them. 1 had also assessed them
about the last of March in this
county believing 1 had the right
so to do, as per transitory herd
act mentioned. The owner of said
sheep pays the taxes on them to
Wasatch County, claiming that his
sheep were IN eGid county on the 1st
day OF April, and Wasatch County
also claims sll of said taxes on the
same grounds. As I look at matters, ,
Jne act must be repealed. or the
other made explicit enough to do
away with any misunderstanding by
assessors OF tGxpayers-
1t would make but little difference
which way this matter would be ar.
ranged las regards the revenue of
this county,, but probably the most
arrangement would be
the amendment heretofore men,
toned.
Ifyou would be SO kind as to pre-
sent this matter to the present Legs
Iature, or hand this communication
to Representative Canute Petersen, OF
5anpete County, you would much
oblige,
Yours Respectfully,
A. E. MERRIAM.