Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1882-10-11
Comments on the Tax Law.

Mr.. Editor In various parts Of the state an
undue amount of censure has been meted out to
those men who have served rs listers under the
new tax law. They no doubt have acted con-
scientiously In disposing OF the inventories,
whether they were or were not filed In the town
clerks office. The language OF the statute IL not
very plain, yet we believe the inventories should
be considered az the personal lists but II we have
not been wrongly informed, the supreme court
was divided on this question in the Mlddletown
case. After due reflection, are they not more de-
serving OF our sympathy than our censure9 The
oath required them to set one per cent OF the true
value OF the appraisal off all the property Of each
town into the grand list, whereas all the property
doubled set into the list at two per cent OF its
true value. Is n man bound to follow his oath as
a guide They were required by the oath to APP
praise the property Of the various towns In the
state at its true ydiue. Have they not done so
Have they not shown themselves as capable and
faithful in the discharge Of their duties as listers
formerly were under Che old law? Under these
circumstances we wish to know the necessity for
an equalizing board. Why seek to alter the true
value2 When alterations are made In the APP
praisal OF some towns in n county, or OF some
counties in the state, by the equalizing board, IL
II not insinuating that some listers have failed to
fulfill the requirements OF the oath2 Is this form
OF the oath humane and reasonable? Is 1t Just
and sensible to require the listers under the SOL
emn obligation OF the oath to appraise the prop
erty OF the state at its true rdteP Is 1t not ask
ing an impossbility? Why is It preferable to the
old oath, viz: :" will appraise the property, etc.
according to the best of my infor-
nation and belief" We are told by candid men,
that at the present time, II is supposed they will
appraise, etc. . to the best Of their in
formation and belief Then in the name OF hui
manity why not complete the oath, and not have
to suppose anything about it. The same objection
would apply In the case of the taxpayer required
April LIST to form an estimate Of the amount OF his
produce not exempt by law, Chat Is, what he may
have some two months after on which he should
pay taxes,) and required also to take the oath
that the answer is correct. An Intelligent man
in neighboring town recently told us that he
disiked the form Of the OATH but rather than pay
more than his share Of td1es he would take Il and
go with the crowd. The prevalent opinion Is
that II good men can take II with impunity II
will not hurt anyone. VIII not such legislation
respecting the oath cause tax payers TO lose that
high regard which the oath, considered in Its true
light calls for2 II some advocate OF this form OF
the oath will tell what 1t was expected to accom-
plish more than the old oath, also II 1t has accom-
plished what was expected OF 1t, he will instruct
very many taxpayers. We admit that the ten
dency Of the age is for something nelD, yet we
pray for the old and sensible oath Of the fatbers
then equalizng boards will follow as reasonable
necessity HrLAND f. PAUL, Wells, Vt,