The weekly Floridian. [volume] (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1867-19??, 1882-08-15
Monticello Constitution, August lO.l
SIS. 769.43 for Taxes.

SIS, 769.43 for Taxes.
The very efficient Revenue Assessor for Jeffer
son county, Mr.. J. p. Grantham, exhibited To us
his tax book on last Monday, and We found it
model for neatness and exactness. There is not
a blot or scratch in the entire book, and we are
advised that of all the tax books filed in the
Comptroller's Office at Tallahassee for several
years, those of our friend Grantham have been
pronounced the most perfect
We also publish detailed statement from
Mr. Grantham, showing the character and value
of all taxable property in Jefferson county toy
the present year. and ii will be observed thDf1t
aggregates 81 514330, and upon this has been
levied a tax OF 23f mills, or $23 15~on every one
thousand dollars worth of pIpptrIy-which will
49,, 769 43. QC>said amount $l1 .997
81 is f0r~the Siate,~and sec al 81 for county
purposes. It's an enormous taxa terrible
drain upon the meagre resources of our people,
and its effects will be felt during the entire year
of 1888. 1t will require the proceeds OF nearly
one thousand bales OF cotton to pay 1t.
This is heavy tax to be assessed in
one year. The assessors book shows the
purpose for which it is levied to be as fol-
lows County tax proper 81 mills, includ-
ing polls, 6,7Ol.O9; County school, 81
mills, $5,3O3.54 interest g. mills, bridges
! mill, *l4, 766. 99-total county $26, i'll
g. State, $ll ,997.sl. Total State and
county, s3s, 769.43.
There have been larger State and county
taxes levied in Jefferson in single year
than this, but there is no instance per-
haps when so great an amount has been
assessed on county account alone. The
tax for school purposes has been increased
and that to meet interest has been en-
larged to make up deficiency on last
years assessment The county tax for
ali purposes Al IO0I Y-v,~~~.~-, =.
that for 1882 is $26,771.62, or $7,l36.12
greater.
The burden hardest to be borne by JEFF
fersOp and other counties similarly circum-
stanced is in providing for the interest on
the old railroad bond debt 1t is true
that these counties were oppressed with
floating and other debts left by the Radi-
Gals which have not yet all been extin-
guished, but the railroad debt hangs like
dead weight upon the people, with no
Immediate prospect Of relief. The annual
interest is no inconsiderable taxation in
itself, and when this is not promptly met
then comes an increase to make up the
deficiency, as we have just seen in the
case of Jefferson. How long is this to
last? We believe that these counties
have an equitable claim on the Internal
Improvement Fund for assistance out of
any surplus of land or money that may
be left after the debts of that fund are ad-
justed, for it was by the operation of the
law creating that fund that the existing
debts were incurred, and it cannot be de-
MED that justice requires that the mis-
chiefs worked by the law should be rene
died by the fund as far as possible.
The Economist takes occasion to con-
trast these figures with those assessed in
Jefferson in 1860 under altogether differ
ent circumstances and conditions. The
whole county tax of Jefferson in that
year was less in amount than the school
tax assessed in 1882, while the interest tar
in 1882 on the debt created between 1855
and 1850 is only fraction greater than
the whole State and county tax of 1860
What is gained by such reference to the
past The people of Jefferson are now
resting in this matter under the burden
imposed in the days before the war, not
since, and they are more concerned in
knowing how best TO discharge the load
than in being told how lightly it fell on
those who created it.
The Economist institutes comparison
between 1875 and 1882, as thus:
Shall we say It the taxes of jefferson in this the
seventh year Of Democratic rule are actually rlore
than 10 1873 when Radical misrue had reached
lie climax Then, with Stearns rs Governor, and
McLin oTganist, the taxes of Jefferson as shown
BY the Democratic text book for our Florida
campaign Of 1875 were $37.07348; now with
Bloxham Governor and Dyke organist they have
swollen TO 3SS, 769.43!
Why did not the Economist, If it de-
sired to instruct its readers, tell them that
over two-thirds of the taxes of 1882 were
levied by county authority aud for county
purposes, and that more than one-half of
the whole county tax was imposed to pay
debts created nearly twenty-five years ago
over which neither Bloxham nor Stearns,
for that matter, or any" organist," had
anything to do? Nay, if it had been
really DESTROYS of furnishing facts from
which the people could have drawn q
practical comparison between Radical and
Democratic administration, why not have
taken series of years under both rules
and shown the State taxation under each
There would have been something to the
purpose in this, since the people would
have been able to see by the comparison
whether Democratic promises of reform
in this respect had been kept or falsi6ed.
Suppose we make the comparison, as in
structiye facts are not in the EcOnonsist's