Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1882-04-26
CROSS-FIRE.
An Interview with Judge Heiskell Con-
corning the Delinquencies in Back.
Tax Collections.
Gen. G.. p. NJ. Turner Contributes a
Poetic but Interesting Idyl on What
is Going Ga.

In yesterdays issue of the APPEAL in the |
special from Nashville appeared note that
the bill to amend the present system of col
Letting back taxes had been rejected by the
House. In order TO ascertain the exact ma
ture of this bill, an APPEAL scribe made a
few Investigations yesterday. The author OF
the bill and the gentleman who claimed that
he defeated it were considered the best sources
of information.
INTERVIEW WITH JUDGE HEIsKELL-
Yesterday an APPEAL reporter called
upon Judge HeiskeIl, as he had prepared
the bill, and obtained from him the purport
and object oft. He said it was entitled, "a
bill for the more efficient collection OF back
taxes"
at first provided" said the Judge, "that
the current taxes-State, county and munic-
ipal-on each piece of property in the hands
OF the back-tax collector should be paid out
of the rents of such property he collected
payment should be paid on back taxes. This
would keep all current taxes fully up and
gradually discharge the back taxes"
at provided, in the second place, that
when piece OF property was found whose
rents would not pay current taxes, that it was
the duty of the back-tax collector to at once
file bill and sell the property for delinquent
dollars of real estate in Memphis that is nom
tax producing, and the prompt taxpayer is
paying the taxes of delinquents. This pro-
vision of the bill was introduced to vitaliZe
this property, SO that il would sgain bear its
legitimate burdens of the government. Under
the construction of the present law property
once delinquent is apt to remain SO, from the
fact that current taxes are not paid, but only
back taxes; and, as State and county have
preference over city taxes, it is at once seen,
as experience demonstrates, that it takes
long time to get to the municipal taxes. For
instance: Under the old city government
there is due to the extinct city 81 100000
back taxes; on the same property there is
due 10 the State and county about S60000O
and before this 81 100000 can be reached at
all the 100000 must be discharged, or the
proportionate part on each particular piece
of property. By this bill, by proceeding in
chancery, giving all parties right TO be
| heard, the property was to be sold for what
it would bring, and the purchaser get good
title, and the property made again tax
paying factor in the State and in the city.
at provided further, that the comptroller
could direct the district attorneys, the county
chairman could direct the county attorney,
| and the municipality direct its attorney to
| file bill against any delinquent property,
| and the fee of not more than $40 to be
charged in the bill of costs for the attorneys;
1 ana gave power ~ SOuuiJ OOuit VI cry
| government TO give their attorneys compen-
| sation for this service not greater than $500
| a year. The $40 fee was stricken out at
| Nashville which was matter of no moment,
the object being to have the enormous back.
tax score cleared off and insure the prompt
payment of taxes. No government is rightly
administered, where the prompt taxpayer
| has not only to bear his own burdens OF
taxation but that of his recalcitrant neigh
| bor"
The bill passed three readings in the
| Senate, and the APPEAL understands that
| the opposition OF some person or persons
| defeated it in the House. 1t was not the OBJ
(, iect of the author of the bill to have this
bill passed, but only to have some bill passed
in the interest of the prompt taxpayer and
| good governn emit The APPEAL hopes that
| the governor will include this matter in his
next call for an extra session of the L gis-
lature.
GENERAL TURNER TALKS.
When the APPEAL reporter had finished
the interview with Judge Heiskell he sought
General G. P. NJ. Turner, understanding
that he had gone to Nashville to oppose the
passage of the bill prepared by Judge Heis-
| kell. The general has different story to
tell from the Judge, and that no injustice
may be done either gentleman, the APPEAL
| publishes their statements side by side. Cen
eral Turner was not told that the reporter
had already interviewed Judge Heiskell, but
was Intervene d Independently and casually.
In answer to the question of the scribe, as to
whether be had gone to Nashville to oppose
the bill, he said: "The law requires that
after trustee nj axes sales of land aud turns
books into hands of circuit court clerk, the
| parties have two years to redeem; at the end
| of ten years, ii the lands are not re-
deemed, it is the duty of the attorney
general of the district to file suits in
the Chancery Court to enforce the States
lien and to perpetuate the title in the pur-
chaser, be it the State or a third party.
| The State comptroller has appointed State
agent here, and he has also been elected
back-tax collector by the County Court
under what provision of law nobody knows.
The circuit clerk has been for several years
turning the books over to this officer, and he
has been engaged in the collection of back
taxes from such parties as voluntarily pay,
and where payments have not been m ade the
properly has been taken possession of by
this officer and rented out, and the money
received for rent applied TO the payment OF
back-taxes, after deducting his commissions,
and in some instances he has, through the
attorney-generaI, instituted suits to enforce
the lien on properly. Many of these suits
have been dismissed on the payment OF the
costs by the owners of the property,
and some of them are now pending.
By late act of the Legislature the
ate has right to bid in this
land when sold under a decree of the
Chaneery Court to enforce its lien. Hence
if the liens were promptly enforced, the
property would pass into the hands CT pur-
chasers, who would buy either at the sale OF
from the Safe, and the property would thus
become live assets and q source of revenue,
instead of remaining the dead load that it is
on the taxpayers that it is under the present
system. The prompt-payiDg taxpayers are
seriously ohjectipg to the present mode OF
collecting back-taxes, and insist that the law
should be enforced more rigidly; that it is
unfair 10 enforce the collection of taxes from
them while this property remains practical
ly unremunerative as source of rev
enue. The bill which recently passed
in the Senate was not regarded
by the prompt-payipg taxpayers as
the law demanded by the exigencies of the
| case, since il only amended the present law
to such an extent as to delay the enforce.
ment of the States lien indefinitely. The
law demanded by the prompt taxpayers is
one that will force this property upon the
market at public sale. under an order of the
court, when the owners refuse 10 pay the
legitimate taxes due thereon. The purport
of the Senate bill which was rejected in the
| House was to the effect that the back-tax
collector should receive the books from the
circuit clerk and continue tor two years tbs
collection OF said taxes at the end OF which
time he might institute suits, provided, in
his judgment, that course was preferable t.
enforce the States lien for the taxes, anc
) that these suits could be brought by the
back-tax collector in his discretion without
the authority or the use Of the name of the
attorney general"
"Who prepared the hill that was rejected
by the houseT' asked the reporter.
Judge Heiskell. He is brother-in-lav
OF Weatherford and has a nephew or two il
his office, and of course is interested OF
Weatherford's account. The bill proposed
in the Weatherford interest would simply
have legalized his actions. The attorney
general should bring suits, and put this prop
| ertx again in the 4ax of naxina In xes ~