Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1880-09-02

of the Board to adopt them, we reprint
them verbatim, flom the CHRONICLE of
August o:
Rule /. All applications for change in the
valuation of individual property or Of town
ships as returned by the district assessors will
be made in writing.
Rule 2. All applicants for reduction in the
valuation of property will be required to state
who, in their opinion, have been assessed too
low in their respective townships.
Rule 8. No change in the valuation of in
dividual property will be made, except upon
inequality being made clearly to appear to
the Board, and NO additions 70 individual
property will be made until after the party
or parties have been notified and given an op-
pcrtunity for hearing.
Rule 4. All applications or complaints to
the Board will be required to be made within
the next ten days.
The law providing for the equalization
of real property will be found in sections
2S13 and 2s14 of the revised statutes.
Section 2s1S provides that
''The Auditor, Surveyor and Commits
sicners of each county shall compose the
county board for the equalization of the
real property within their county,
land they shall convene at the
Office of the County Auditor on the Tues
day after the first Monday in September,
1880, and every tenth year thereafter !;
and each shall be sworn fairly and i'm
partially to equaliZe the value of the
real estate within the county that is
within their jurisdiction, according to
law.
Section 2814. The Auditor shall lay
before the board the returns made by
the district assessors, with the additions
which he shall have made thereto; and
they shall then Immediately proceed to
equalize such valuation, so that each
tract or lot shall be entered on the tax
list at its true value, and for this pur-
pose they shall observe the following
rules: 1st. They shall raise the valua-
tion of such tracts and lots of real prop
erty as, in their opinion, have been re-
turned below their true value to such
price or sum as they may believe to be
the true value thereof; I'd. They shall
reduce the valuation of such tracts and
lots as, in their opinion, have been re-
turned above their value, as compared
with the average valuation of the real
property of such county, having due re-
gard to their relative situation, quality
of soil, improvement, natural and arti-
ficial advantages possessed by each
tract or lot; Sd. They shall not reduce
the aggregate value thereof, as returned
by the assessors, with the addition made
thereto by the auditor, as hereinbefOre
required"
The additions by the Auditor, spoken
of, are lands and lots that may have
been omitted, and property valued for
taxation 10y others than those known as
Township Assessors, which the Auditor
is required to place upon the tax dupli-
cate.
The powers and duties of county
Boards of Equalization are set forth in
the two sections above quoted from the
revised statutes. If there is anything
therein, or elsewhere in the statutes.
which authorizes the Board of Equaliza-
ton to require a citizen who may ap-
ply to it for relief to submit in writing
the name of a neighbor upon whose
farm or town lot it should add what it
should take off the valuation for taxa
tion of his farm or town lot, we would
be glad to have it pointed out. The law
requires the Board to proceed to equal
iZe such valuations" and that it shall
reduce such as, in its opinion, are too
high, and add to such as, in its opinion,
are too low, "having due regard to their
relative situation, quality Of soil, i'm
provements, natural and artificial ad-
vantages," &C., and that it shall not re-
duee the aggregate value of such prop
erty; but nowhere does it authorize the
county Board to require man to "suh-
init in writing" the name of neighbor
upon whom part of the burden that
has been put upon him by the Land
Appraiser shall be transferred. This re-
quirement is unreasonable, is heretofore
unknown in this county, and amounts,
practically, to denial of relief to those
whose lots or lands may be valued for
taxation higher than those of their
neighbors.
We anticipate the answer that will be
made to this: That the Board could not,
of itself, know to whose lot or farm the
amount taken from the taxable valua-
tiOn of another farm or lot should be
added. But why announce to all the
county that written application for
such transfer will be round in the office.
and to the individual to whose property
the additional taxation is to be added
the fact that his neighbor has made
such application, specifying the particu-
lar farm or lotP Who wants to incur
the everlasting ill-will of his neighbor
by taking upon himself the burden of a
transaction which the law places upon
this Board? And yet that is precisely
what this Board requires.
1t is right enough, perhaps. to give an
individual notice before adding any
thing to the taxable valuation of his
farm or lot, but it is unreasonable to re-
quire Taxpayer to designate in the
public manner set forth in the foregoing
rules the person to whose property a
share of the burdens put upon his land is
to be transferred. and. we repeat, is, prac-
tically, denial of the remedy which the
law designs to afford