River Falls journal. [volume] (River Falls, Pierce County, Wis.) 1872-2019, 1880-01-01
ASSESSMENT OF PROPERTY.

| ness to yourselves aim to contribute
to the happiness of others.
|
ASSESSMENT OF PROPERTY.
The basis established by law upon
which property shall be assessed is
unequiyocal and mandatory, and u
meeting of assessors to agree upon a
certain rule of assessment implies a
purpose to adopt different standard
than that prescribed by the statutes.
Since we have questioned the validity
of the official acts of an assessor when
founded upon an agreement of two or
more assessors to assess property upon
different basis than that provided by
law, it is our purpose to illustrate the
question raised by going somewhat in
to detail.
Section 1862 of the Revised Statutes
provides that real property shall be
valued by the assessor either from &C
tual view or from the best information
that the assessor can practically OBJ
tain, at the full vdtue which could or
dindrity be obtained therefor at private
sale, and that in determining the value
the assessor shall consider, as to each
piece, its advantage or disadvantage
of location, quality of soil. quantity
of standing timber. water privileges,
mines, minerals, quarries, or other
valuable deposits known to be availa-
BILE therein, and their value. Section
1855 of the Revised Statutes provides
that all articles of personal property
shall, as far as practicable. be valued
by the assessor upon actual view, at
their true cash pGtue. These provi-
sions are plain, and easily understood.
That they are almost universally dis
regarded is equally true, and the SUI
preme Court of Wisconsin has thrice
set the seal of its condemnation upon
acts done in defiance of the statutory
rule that desIgnates the basis upon
plOpCAbJ bC 4AV
Supreme Court holds that in order to
support a valid tax, there must be a
valid assessment made in substantial
compliance with the statute; that
proper listing and valuation of proper
ty by the assessor constitute the very
foundation of the subsequent proceed
ings, and where the assessor makes an
assessment in direct violation of the
rules and principles prescribed by stat
ute, the tax fails. In his opinion up
ON case involving the validity of an
assessment, Associate Justice Cole
says: There is really no security to
the taxpayer except in requiring as
SCISSORS to perform their duty and make
assessments in substantial compliance
with the law; for, if the assessor in
one town is permitted to assess prop
erty at one-third its value, the assessor
in another town may assess it at one
| half, or one-fourth, while still anoth-
er at double its value, substituting the
mere caprices of the officer for the
| rule of the statute and resulting in
| the groSsest inequalities and injustice
in the taxes imposed" The Statute
! requires of each assessor an affidavit
| that he has made hissassessment in ac-
cordance with the requirements of
| the Statute, and if such affidavit be
not annexed to the assessment roll the
assessor has not completed his duty
| and there is no assessment in law; if
| the assessor annexeS such affidavit to
| an assessment made contrary to law
| he takes a false oath. Chief Justice
Ryan, in an opinion upon the subject
in question, says: "It is very easy for
assessors TO be honest in the discharge
of their duties; and if honest, their
errors of judgment can operate little to
| impair the uniform rule of the consti-
| tuition. If they should be suffered to
substitute rule of their own for the
rule of the statutes, and yet to uphold
| their assessments by an oath that they
| have followed the statutory rule, it
| appears to me not eXtravagant to say
| that taxation in this State would rest
! less upon uniform rule of assessment
| than upon a uniform rule of fraud
and perjury The supreme Court, in
not less than three different cases, has
decided that any assessment made con-
trary to the express provisions of the
statute yitiates the tax levied upon
such illegal assessment. and since
| these decisions have been promulgated
it is q matter of some surprise to note
the evident disregard of both the law
and judicial decisions sustaining it..
1t was argued by counsel before the
Supreme Court that the statutory rule
of assessment is generally disregarded
| by assessors, and that the consequence
es of holding assessors to a compile
ance with their duties, under the stat
ute and the constitution, would be
disastrous. To this plea the Chief
| Justice responded as follows: "It is
impossible for me to judge how far 50
vicious habit may prevail among the
| assessors. But. even if it were uni
versal. il seems impossible to me that
it should influence the court to hest
tate in giving effect to all the conse-
quences of their Nillful disregard Of
| duty. If it be true that assessments
throughout the State are frequently ,oi
generally, or universally, made in de-
fiance of the statutory rule, il appears
TO nae better that the State ard the
municipal corporations of the State
should suffer Inconvenience, than that
our whole system of taxation should,
az the mere viii Of local officers, be a