Chariton courier. (Keytesville, Chariton County, Mo.) 1878-current, 1884-12-19
Communication.
tFr0ln ssIisbury Press.speetato..:.l

~
MEssRs EDTroRs 81 the last issue
of your paper appears an article over
the signature of J. NJ. Hamilton. as
treasurer and ex-officio collector of
Charlton county, in which the per-
sonaI invective indulged IN towards
me, is such as demands reply, and
Respectfully ask space in your valu-
able paper for that purpose.
Mr. Hamilton says: 'sAs to TAX
ing my commission on the entire tax,
regardless of all compromises made
by the county, plead guilty" This
admission on Mr.. Hamilton's part is,
in force and effect, plea of guilty
to all charged him with. and there
by relieves me of the necessity of
producing the proof of his guilt.
The only question at issue in which
the people can be interested is
whether the amount of commission,
so collected by Mr.. Hamilton, is more
than is allowed him by law, and to
that proposition 1 will first direct at
tention. But in order that we may
have Mr.. Hamilton's views more
fully before US, we will quote from
his article still farther; he says:
'sIt is true, as Judge Smith stated,
that in the case of suit and forced
collection, the collector and his at
torney are entitled to receive COM
pensation only ON the amount actually
collected, but in case Of compromises
the court says the tax and interest
may be paid at 333 per cent of the
original amounts, provided the COM
missions and fees are paid in full, =
The County Court does not make
any such erder as that, and, / am
satisfied, will never attempt to do
such an illegal act. The compensa-
ton of the collector and his attorney,
as admitted by Mr.. Hamilton, is re-
ssEicted to 4 commission on the
amount actually collected. The
County Court, in its order of COM
promise, exercises jurisdiction over
the demand which the state and
county has against the tax payer,
and this determines the amount to be
received BIZ the collector in full set
tlement of the tax bill. Hence the
Importance and justice of that provis-
ion Of the law limiting the fees of the
officers to commission on the
amount actually collected, instead OF
a commission on the whole amount
charged on the tax hook. Any other
view OF the case is simply preposter-
Gus.
When the County Court, after ex-
amining any case presented, finds
sufficient error, or other cause to or
der reduction of the tax bill, GER
talnly no officer can have any claim
to a commission on the amouns,
which under the order OF the court is
not d,se, and by reason of which the
officer does not collect. And as an
additional reason against the injustice
and illegality of the official conduct
to which Hamilton pleeds guilty, l
will state that there is no tax bill bas-
ed on any tax hook in Mr.. Hamilton's
possession for any year back of 1888,
the collection of which can be en-
forced by suit in court of law, be-
cause of the fatal defects and errors
in the tax books. The County Court
knows that fact, and hence the action
of the Court in authorizing compro-
mises to be made at 335 per cent OF
the amount charged on the back tax
books.
If Mr.. Hamilton's action in taking
the illegal commission complained OF
was hased upon legal tax bill, the
collection of which could be enforced
by suit in any court of law, then his
claim to commission on the whole
amount charged in the tax book, re-
gardIess of compromises made by the
County Court, is unsupported by the
statute regulating his fees.
Mr.. Hamilton is aware of the fact
that the County Court differs will
him in regard to the commissions
which he should take from the tar
payers. The court refused TO make
an order approving or IN any man
ner endorsing his official conduet ii
that regard, although applied to By
Mr.. Hamilton for that purpose. Th'
County Court holds the opinion tha'
fees and commissions of officers can
not be placed nn any other, or high
| er basis than the tax bill upon which
the collection is actually made.
In reply to Mr.. Hamilton 3 charg'
THAT 1 received So for each tax sui
brought by me as prosecuting attor
lney. The law then in force did no
provide for a special tax attorney a.
| it now does. 1t was then made the
duty of the prosecuting attorney t
attend TO such cases, and as compen
sation for his servises in each case
The was limited to an attorneys feeo
| s5. / filed about zoe suits, and
received compensation in less thar
| 100 suits. There was much more
Justly due me, but I never got it.
received pay in no case except wher
| :. ~ II II -x,SlI<,r4