Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1882-07-04


practice the committee consider unauthor
izsd, unless in cases OF minor children, and
should only be made by him upon the order
. Of a competent Judicial authority. The
property l. placed Ia bis hands for the pur-
pose OF collecting the taxes in the shortest
possible time, to the end thatthe same may
be returned to the proper owner, and only
extreme cases should justify the collector in
dividing rents with said owners. There is no
good reason Tor the collector retaining so
large sum OF mis- rent collections in his
hands as Is shown by this report. As coon
a. there Is sufficient amount TO the credit
OF any piece OF property TO paw years
taxes thereon, the same should be paid over
to the proper officers Many instances were
noticed where property had been condemned
and sold Tor taxes, That receipts had come TO
light during the past year showing that
the taxes had been paid to prior
collectors. Mr.. Weatherford saws that in
every instance he retains copies OF these
receipts, and reports the same TO the proper
legal officer Tor such action as NAV be
deemed proper in the premies. The COM
mIttee desire to refer 10 the sweeping and
wholesale reductions made in the assessed
value of delinquent property, and to the
consequent injustice thereby done 10 the
prompt taxpayer. These reductions vary in
many instances from one-half 10 one-third.
and sometimes 10 One-fourth OF the original
| assessment, and from examination the COM
mittee think not more than one-third of the
property in this Office upon which taxes
have been collected has been paid upon at
Its original assessment, and IN som. in
stances reductions in assessments have been
NJ ade and as yet no tax has been paid. This
is manifest injustice to ne prompt tax
pfyer, who pays upon the VAN OF his prop
J eSty as then al----eviJ rrrd is Sctuaily paying
he delinque1N a premiuuA for his de
linqueney. A9ssSsmehts shauld not lie
reduced nor, unless it can be clear
proven that the sanae were in
excess OF its relative ! value then,
nor do the committee believe tthat two-thirds
OF Tue property delinquent WAS assessed so
enormously beyond is true relative value.
This point Was refer1ei to by the committee
of Last year, but with apparently no effect,
the reductions continuing as actively as ever
| Your committee also call attention 10 the
| system of renting out property, and susgest
! the following rules safe and expedient.
| fHst-Ail leases to be approved by the
! chairman OF the County Court, who shall
| keep record of the same in his office.
SecoHd.-1he collector 10 be required to
| make monthly report 10 the chairman Of the
| County Court and to the State comptroller of
| the rents collected and OF the sums expended |
in repairs, accompanied with vouchers there
for. This report should embrace every piece
Of property under rent, and if for any cause
rents shoulC not he collected such cause
should be shown. Under the system now in
vogue more than dozen books must be re-
lerred TO before the tax for which piece of |
property is liable can be aggregated. The |
proper books should be furnished the col |
lectOr so that the various taxes may be con-
soidated, aud one place in one book be made |
TO show what the property owes TO the State
and county. The collector should be re-
quired TO keep Cash-boDk and ledger in |
proper form, and upon his ledger keep a |
tria III the State and pf |
all taxes collected and disbursed these books
to be retained in his Office and turned over
to his successor as the permanen, record of
his Office Tue collectors bonds are salts
factory. He has shown pom tness and eff
cheney in the collection of The revenues.
General Vau=han's office.
J. w. Fulmer, Chairman Grand Jury Committee
OF Nineteen, Memphis, Tenn:
DEAR SIR-Your subcommittee appointed
TO examine the books, accounts, etc, of A.
J. Vaughan, clerk of the Criminal Court of
Shelby county, respectfully report as follows:
We commenced our work at the place the
committee of last year left off, viz: LIST OF
May, 1881. And we have carefully checked
and thoroughly examined all books connect
ed with the office up to the 1st of May, 1882.
And We are pleased to state that we found
the same correct, as per exhibit below. His
vouchers show prompt and proper settle
ments with the comptroller of the State,
trustee Oh Ine county anu All Olher persons
who have dealings with his office. The law
requiring bonds OF $4,000, covering the fnsn-
cial interests of the office, and $4,000 for
correct keeping of the records, has been fully
coinslied with. We found the fol lowing names
on the former, viz DIR. G. B. Thornton and
DIR. J. Y. Cumniipgs; and DR.. G. B. Thorn
ton and L. 5. Davis on The ALTERNATING
both bonds good, we think. a comparison
OF .he fees charged hy the clerk aud attorney
general with the statute shows compliance
with the law. A very thorough system Of
checking on the business obtains in this
court. A cost bill is made in every
case, and is first examined and signed
by the judge. The encouragement then
examines and signs it, after which lin felony
cases) it is forwarded to and examined by
the comptroller of The State, and Tin INSIDE
meanor cases. goes to the chairman OF the
County Court, who examines and checks
with the Criminal Court clerk. An abstract
of both is kept on file by the clerk. The
only Improvement we would suggest as add
ing to the cOmprehensiveness OF the system
now operated in keeping the books of this
Office would be regular ledger, embracing
the leading accounts kept by this court.
the results OF the auxiliary books would
then flow into it, and the work of checking
the whole business for any length of time
would be very simple. Also think the exc
cution docket should be signed by the Judge
and attorneygenersl in all cases, just as
the cost bills are now signed. This would
enable the clerk to keep a permanent copy
OF all cost bills in book form aud would IA
cilitate examinations. Owing to The factthat
the comptroller of the State and the trustee
OF the county require copy each OF all cost
bills 1t leaves no signed copy with the clerk,
and hence we can only produce abstracts OF
the same. We would call attention to he
fact that ont of total amount OF witness
fees during the year examined), say
he f,.l 10
of them:
Collected by original parties to whom they
CoiIected nv snudry other parties -. IL 50
Collected by w. J. Algeo. 2jI ST
On hand and not called for..-... 173 16
We would suggest that where il is possible
that the original party TO whom witness fees
are issued be requested 10 collect the same,
and not be permitted to dispose of them TO
outside parties, IS appears 10 be the case as
shown ABOVE. We highly commend Judge
HorIigan's ruling in compelling many par
Ties arrested to make a deposit OF money for |
appearance, instead of taking a bond with
worthless indorsers who have heretofore been
permitted to 20 on the same and from whom
nothing could be secured and no property
found, thereby causing useless expense TO the
State and county.
EXHIBIT "a"
Oh cA peilstb Oh tne |
Criminal Court three terms from May term,
1881, to May term, 1882 as compared with
he tn rec terms previous to the present ad-
IN lnistration:
STATE BIS Of Cost
term lSlI........ $500 IS
anuary term Is l,3l6 o.
May term, BIS. 4,IY5 60
r.1 e.. =, : | ,
|
september term lSSI---..---.. -. 3,I39 on
State witnesses, three terms ...r..... 23IS %
1OtaI--- O,SIO 4S :
County Bills Of Cost.
repten Der term, Is III q
January term, loses A.
May term, 1873 -- GO2i 10
Total 737 SO
May term 1851 .... .......S 2 l3l q 7
september term, 1ool. 424D II
January term lSS2.... 1926 90
Total. SO o1S %
S,ote Monthly Jail BIS.
Total August, 1877, 10 August, 1873 ,424 60
Total May, 1881, 10 May, $500 so
County Monthly Jail Bills.
Total August 1877, to August 1873 ms ISL 90
Total May, 1881, 10 May, 1852 LBS so
Jurors Per Diem. /