The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1883-03-15
Auditor Allen has the Floor
OFFICE OF !
AUDITOR OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS.
RICHMOND, February oath, 1883. J

} NV name having been made somewhat pub
| | lie by reason Of certain so called criminal pro
,ceedings instituted against me in the Husting
Court Of this city, proper respect for thu
opinions of my fellow-citizens, as well as my
!, Town sense of honor, demand that | should
furnish the public with statement OF facts al
they really exist.
"The head and front of my offending is tC
this extent no more:
In the discharge of my official duties as
Auditor of Public Accounts /, last year, as
soon as the delinquent lists We're certified to
my office, proceeded as the law requires to ap-
point collectors to collect the delinquents taxes
in the various counties and cities of the State
The law under which | acted is found in the
goth section. Chapter 60 of the Acts of AS
sembly of 1889, and is the same law by
which my ACKNOWLEDGMENT, Taylor and
Massey-had been governed in making SIM
liar appointments. The goth section provides
as follows
"a certified copy Of the first and third lists
Delinquency, heretofore returned, shall be
placed by the Auditor of Public Accounts,
within sixty days after receiving the originals,
or as soon thereafter as prat ticable, in the
hands cot any sheriff. sergeant. constable or
collector, for collection, the same to be ac-
counted tor within one year thereafter; said
officer to have the same power of distress as
treasurers, and shall account for the same in
like manner, and he and his sureties shall be
i subject to all such remedies as are given the
Commonwealth against treasurers for failure
to pay and his compensation shall not exceed
twenty per centum of the amount collected
and paid into the Treasury. <
But in no case shall such delinquent lists be
placed for collection in the hands OF any Off
Ger who has returned the same"
This law clearly vests the Auditor with the
power 10 appoint anyone collector to collect
! the delinquent taxes on the first and third
| lists the only exception being that the lists
shall not be placed "in the hands Of any officer
who has returned the same" The object of
the law is to provide ample means by which
the delinquent taxes can and will be collected,
and when the Auditor makes appointment of
persons who faithfully and efficiently perform
their dnties in collecting and paying the
amounts collected into the Treasury, he has
confOrmed not only to the strict letter, but to
| the spirit of the law. And if, perchance, any
one should begin To act as collector of de-
linquent taxes beto:e executing bond, and
honestly pays what he has collected into the
| Treasury, what ground is there for complaint
from any source Has not the tax payer paid
and has not the State received her revenue?
For any dereliction of duty on the part of the
| Auditor in the appointment of collectors, he
and his suretes are responsible. The collector,
after receiving his appointment, must comply
with the law, and the taxpayer who pays his
taxes to anyone unauthorized 10 collect does
it at his own risk. The State is protected by
these safeguards as well as can be against loss
OF any kind resulting from such appointments.
Experience has proven Enthusiastically that the
appointment of persons who are not en-
numbered by the duties of other offices, and
| who are, therefore, able to devote their whole
| time and attention to the work for which they
! are especially commissioned THAT of collecting
delinquent taxes) as far preferable to the ap-
pointment of sherits, sergeants or constables.
The collections of delinquent taxes made by
! sherlts, sergeants, and constables, as appears
from the records of the Auditors office, are
| insignificant as compared with the large col
lections made by the special delinquent tax-
collector whose only duty is TO collect de-
linquent taxes. They have indeed collected |
thousands of dollars aud paid it into the Treas
ury which would have been lost to the State |
if had not appointed these collectors, or if |
had placed the lists i'll the hands of the officers
mentioned. But, my fellow citizens, under
my administration of this office in respect to
the appointment of delinquent ax-collectors,
what results have l accomplished? Let us |
see. appointed for the year 1881 one hun
dred and seventeen observation-disclosures hun
dred and three OF whom executed bond, leav- |
ing fourteen but of this fourteen, two were |
already bonded officers and five declined to |
serve, and four, although they qualified, did |
not act, so that of my one hundred and seven
teen appointees only three failed to give bond
in fact. What did Mr.. Massey do? Let us
see. Mr.. Massey, for the year 1880, appointed |
seventy-two observation-disclosures OF
whom gave bond, leaving thirty-fve who die
not execute bond, and never have to this day.
My collectors for the year 1881, appointed in
October last, having served half the year, have
to this date paid into the public Treasury $14,-
050.75 Mr.. Massey's collectors for the year
1880, having served the entire twelve months,
paid into the State Treasury, all told, $4,000.
My collectors have, in truth, paid in more
money than the combined payments of all the
collectors appointed by all the Auditors since
the enactment of the law itself. But all these
things count for nothing with him who has q
sordid purpose to subserve; whose protested |
patriotism consists in extreme partizanry and
whose reason is warped and dethroned by
prejudice and passion. Something must be
done, my fellow citizens, to counterfeit the eff T
feet and to satisfy the spite and venom oc-
casionei by the proceedings in the United
States Court then in session in the city of |
Richmond. and for this purpose the machinery
of the Hastings Court of the city Of Rich
mond was set in motion by Judge Geo. L.
Christian, and the Auditor of Public Accounts
was selected as victim of his wrath, to be
indicted, prosecuted, and convicted if possible,
of such offences as he (the judge might choose
to mention. 1t was while the Auditor was in
attendance on the Hastings Court as wit
ness, and while testifying in regard to the
bond of John ID. Smelling, collector, that he
was harshly and rudely deprived of his per-
sonal liberty and taken in custody by the ser
geant OF the city of Richmond, by order of
Judge Christian, and, without warrant or in
dictment, was held to bail in the paltry sum
of $500 to answer a charge that might per-
chance be brought against him in the future.
which was in violation of law and crime
against human rights and PERSONA freedom
At the same time Judge George l.. Christian,
from whose shoulders the virtuous drapery of
his judicial ermine had been gently removed
by the party TO which belonged directed the
attorney for the Commonwealth, s. B. Witt,
Esq, to bring my conduct TO the attention of
the grand jury, Len an session. and have me in
dicted for destroying the bond of John d
Smelling, collector Of delinquent taxes; for
aiding and abetting John D. Smelling in forg-
ing has 0aon bond, and for misfeasance and
malfeasance in office in returning to
John ID. Smelling, collector, his bond
All this was accordingly done; tnree separate
indictments for these offences being found
agains. me, on the same day was arrested, and
the grand jury being kept in session until can
delight while the indictments were formu-
lated in obedience to the wishes of the Judge
of this court. On the day of election, the 9TH
of November last, Judge George L. Christian,
without the shadow of law, ordered the Judges
of election in the city of Richmond, by circu-
lar letter. in regard to the legality of tax-re-
cepts issued by John D, Smelling, collector, as
follows there being no authority of law to
appoint more than one tax collector for any
city or county, Snelling's receipts for taxes
will not be recognized" If, for the appoint
ment Of Mr., John d. Smelling delinquent tax
collector, there was mo authority of law"
then nothing is palmer than that any bond ex-
ecuted by him was totally null and void, and |
could not be public record How, then,
from the standpoint of Judge Christian himself,
was it possible for the Auditor to have been
guilty of any offence in destroying a bond
which was nullity and not public record
How was it possible for the Auditor to commit
any offence in destroying forged bond? or +
in assisting any one to forge a void bond ? or
in returning to John D. Smelling his forged !
void bond The Judge took this position on
election day, when, ifhis instructions had been
followed by the judges of election, they would
have deprived all who held tax receipts issued
by John d Smelling from voting but after
ward, when il became necessary to indict and
prosecute the Auditor. the willy Judge changed
his position in respect to the legality of the
appointment ofMr. John D. Smelling and the
necessity for such y change is very apparent;
fNrf ha hNr, h. ii.