The Superior times. [volume] (Superior, Wis.) 1870-1912, 1884-05-03
WHAT THE LAW REQUIRES MUST BE DONE
THE COUNTY NOT BENEFITED BY CHEAP
ADVERTISING.

ADVERTISING.
| From the Polk County Press June 2, 1888.
/ Several wears ago this whole matter
of tax list printing, and the duties of
county officers, under the law, CON
corning it, were discussed and settled
for all time, in St. Croix county. The
case decided in that county was ex-
actly the case now under considera-
ton in Polk county. Those who are
making themselves prominent in the
discussion of this matter, if better ac-
quainted with public affairs, would
know this. 1t is not expected that
the editor of the Dalles ever heard of
it. The law of state applies to Polk
county as well as to St Croix. The
democrats had deceived the people in
ST Croix county to that extent, in
their bowling over letting the tax list
printing to the lowest bidder, that the
party finally rode into power, with
that as one of the issues. The repub
licans then bid the lowest for the
printing, but the Democrats then hay
ing the printing replied to them:
No, gentlemen this tax list print
ing cannot be let to the lowest
bidder. The law does not give officers
any authority to so let it, except in
certain specified eases. We know that
the position of the democratic party
was the other way before election, but
what we advocated then was for the
purpose of deceiving the people. Now
that we are. elected we must do what
the law requires, and it gives no au-
thority to let to the lowest bidder, ex-
cept as it provides, when the lists are
over 1900 and 5000 descriptions,
They proved this to be legal and kept
the printing at full legal rates. The
Hudson Star and Times, in comment
inc on this action few weeks ago,
said:
The value of the tax list printing was thor
oughly canvassed at the time referred 20. and the
True Republican carried OFF the list at full legal
rates in the very face OF lower bid by ms. Dis
trict attorney Glover, the principal owner of the
/ up-street property, convinced both papers that
the Star was wrong, by fling his legal opinion
! that the county should pay IKE full legal rate
and could NOT entertain lower bid!
Again, in the democratic county
convention for St Croix county, held
October 18th, 1876, the following res
olution was adopted, which refers to
an official decision CT Judge Welher-
by upon the same question:
RESOLVED That il having been officially dccid
ed by the last republican Attorney General and
also by the present (democraticl Attorney Gener-
. Z 81 j., RI N uriptinu hills lpTtipu
/ the tax list printing of st. CroiX county TO the
lowest bidder; that such laws were un-constitu-
tional and void, unless they included in their
provisions every county III the state; therefore
our senator and assemblymen are requested to
move in the legislature, Tor another opinion on
I that subject; and If found lawful then To urge
the passage of such a law for all the counties;
and this we deem the best settlement OF this queS
ton for the reason that the late republican
! county treasurer and county clerk were officially
! advised by L. 7. Wetherby (dem0crap. district
attorney. and other competent counsel that if
they let the tax list printing To- any newspaper at
less than legal rates that such a contract would
not be lawful and could not be enforced.
At the next session of the legisla-
ture the assemblyman of St Croix
county did ''move in the legislature"
as requested to do in the above resolu-
ton. He moved by having the as
sembly adopt resolution, asking the
Attorney General Of the state for his
opinion on the tax list question, and
it will be found as follows, in full on
page 1872, Journal Of the Assembly for
the session of 1877. The law in re-
gard to printing tax lists is the same
now as it was in 1877:
TO THE HoHoRABLE. THE ASSEMBLY or THE STATE
OF WISCONSIN:
have this day received a copy of resolution
No. -, A. requesting he attorney general to in
First Whether county clerk or county treas
urer has authority under existing laws, to let the
/ oflands sold for taxes, to the lowest bidder?
! Second. Whether it would be constitutional
for the legislature to pass special act, requiring
the officers Of any one county olei is delinquent
4 tax list printing TO the lowest bqder?
( And have the honor to submit the following
reply:
The existing law provides that there shall be
/ allowed to the printer who shall publish any no
I tice of sale of lands Tor taxes, for each lot or
! tract twenty cents, and for publishing notice
of the time when redemption of lands sold for
/ taxes VIII expire, for each lot or tract thirty
cents.
Other provision is made that when the list of
lands TO be advertised by the county treasurer
shall exceed 1000 descriptions, and when the
! number of descriptions shall exceed $500 NOW
5000 in the list 10 be advertised by the county
{ clerk such officers shall let the publication of
such lists to the lowest bidder, etc.
In the cases provided for the officer hes the
power and ii is his duty to let the publication To
( the lowest bidder, in pursuance OF the terms OF
the statute. The law, i'll my opinion, is valid
| one. but | do not think that in cases where the
lists do not exceed 1000 and ? $50 nov 5000 re-
spcctivey that the officer has the power to let to
the lowest bidder iii the latter the fee of the
printer is specifically fixed by law and no aa-
thority is given for contracting for lower fee
The law giving power to let to the lowest bidder
I il the one case, raises strong implication that
! the legislature did not intend to have the con-
. tract let in any other case.
As TO the ID question:
The constitution provides that the rule Of taxa
ton shall be uniform. and by the amendment of
1871 the legislature is prohibited from enactng
any special law for assessment or collection OF
( taxes
The advertising Of the list is step in collection
of taxes, and a necessary part OF the process:
speciai legislation is forbidden, and am Of opin
ion that a law requiring the officers OF any one
county to let the printing OF its delinquent tax
list To the lowest bidder would be unconStitution-
al Very respectfully,
Attorney General
One year after Attorney General Wilson said:
concur in the above.
ALIEN. WILSON,
Attorney General.
Date Jan. 10, 1873.
Supported as he was by the law,
II