West Virginia argus. [volume] (Kingwood, W. Va.) 1877-1946, 1884-03-21
JOSEPH SPRIGG ON THE GOVERN
OR'S ASSESSMENT ORDER.
WILLIAM G.. BROWN, JR.

receipt of your letter of let inst sskinl
me to give you ny views in reference u
the supplementary assessment order Of
Gov. Jackson, and also in reference to tn,
action the Democratic party should take
thereon. While do not believe my views
will have much influence IN shaping the
position OF our party on this or any other
ing them truly and cheerfully to friend.
In the first place, allow me 10 say, am
very decidedly of the opinion that great
deal more ado has been made about this
matter than any sense in, or necessity for.
There is no reason in the world for any
person or persons stirring up strife in the
State over such q matter as this. If Gov
Jsck'on is wrong in his position, II is a
very easy matter TO correct him, aud set
the matter at rect. Perhaps II you or
had been in the Governors position, we
would not have done as he has, but at the
same time, believe he is clearly right mp.
on the law of the case. do not believe
there is respectable lawyer in the State
who will say he believes the statute ex-
cepting certain kinds of property from as.
sessment and taxation, is constitutional
Whether the Governor should have left
the whole question with the legislative
department after the decision of the Court
of Appeals In the Ches. d. Ohio r. Il
case, or called attention TO the state of
affairs In the way he has, is a matter about
which gentlemen may entertain dIffeIent
notions. But cannot see that he has
committed any crime or done any body o.
class of people any great harm or wrong
in doing what has. 1t is simply oNR mode
of raising the question and putting II In
process of adjustment. 1t is ihessme way
in which the question was raised in the
case of the Ches. u Ohio X. X Co. Sup
pose that company had never been assessed
| with tsxes-that question would still re-
main undecided-that company would
still be escaping taxation, When the
question, in reference TO Ches. 81 Ohio
II X. was raised, IL did not rush TN
to the political arena for an adjustment OF
1t. The company resortcd TO the legal
wibunals OF the State whose
duty IL Is to settle all questions of
this character. This lie In no sense a po-
| litical question. II Is A PURELY LKaAL
ONE. l wish To IMPRESS THO view upon
your mind. In the present attitude of the
latter, political parties have no sort of
business with it. IT liz NOT question of
the enactment of law upon the subject;
1t Is simyly and soLRLY a question of the
proper Interpretation of constitutional
prOvisIOn-whether a certain provision OF
law exempuDg certain kinds of property
from assessment and taxation is in conflict
with the constitution Of the State or not.
The Governor thinks the provision Of law
Ia in conflict with the constitution, anC
that such property 10 subject To assess-
ment and taxation, ard accordingly he hat
directed the Auditor to have the proper
officers assess il. Now If any person ID
honest and sincere in the belief that the
Governor IL mistaken IN the law, and feels
that he has been wronged by the Govern
Of's action ia the matter. why not 20
about testing the question 10 the proper
| 'Ntea "eJs " W NV hhhAt up n NSSt ChSt
for the c,urts and have IL decided ? Thc,
is the way Ia find out who IL right about
this matter. Why seek TO lug purely
legal question iDto the whirlpool OF poll
tics-a question which the people cannot
now settle ? II the courts sustain the
Governors view of this matter, then the
remedy 10 Sn amendment to the constitu-
ton, IL the ,'eople want to exempt this
property. The whole matter IL very plain
and simple, and there is no earthly use In
aD this stir about 1t. The peoDle who are
making all this ado about the re assess
ment, intend no good to the people. Their
| purpose 10 TO excite the farmers of the
State and make them believe that the
Democrats are unjustly increasing their
tsxes. Ga this excitement, IL they can
raise enough of IT, they hope to accom-
pllsh the overthrow OF the party and
slide into office. These men are trying o.
mislead the people on this question, and
some OF them know IL, hut they do not
care If they car but accomplish their pur.
/ pose-the overthrow Of the Democratic
party. This is what prompts them u
their action 10 the matter. II is not the
owe they have for the farmer. This, /
say, is the object of our Republican friends.
Why any Democrat should go astray and
aid them in their purpose, confess can
not understand. have confidence i'm the
good hard sense Of our farmers, snG feel
quite sure that when they once get an
understanding Of the question, they will
do the right thing about II. They should
be made 10 understand that az the matter
Is now presented, II is SIMPLY and PuRRIY
a legal questiOn--one Of the courts 10 dc
eide, and II the courts sustain the Gov
ernor's view OF the law, and they. Ohe
fsrmers) want this property exempt from
taxation, they can amend the constitution
and have II exempted. To. attempt set
Element Of this question 10 any other way,
than through the courts, Is, In my iudg
ment, anti-demOcratic sDd revolutionary.
j think you Will have no difficulty In see
ing, from what / have said, the position I
think our party ought 70 take on this ques-
ton. The question has been raised wheth.
er properly or not, Bnd II should be ptop-
erly and speedy settled. Let 70 20 the
courts where II properly belongs,
and be there judicislly de-
termined. This Is the only way to settle
the matter properly and pat il at rest.
This is the way the Democratic party