The Opelousas courier., 1886-08-21

BATON ROUGE, La, Aug 10, 1886.

uuSdH NoOnAEh wv AA"H"Ay A|O"o7
cfat of the 9TH SEE published your open
letter to HE which +" seems to me but
lame excuse - in the way of an explana
ton "tlat does not explain y why my
statement TO you failed to account sat
isfactorily for the deficit, especially for
the year 1884," and the apparent
shortage in the collectors accounts"
You say gave your explanation
of this deduction list to those who in
auired about the statement, but it failed
to enlighten them as it had failed to en-
tighten me, and the comments came in
spite of it," What induced nnfavorable
comments from those to whom you ex-
hibited the statement? Was it not the
explanation which you gave to them,
and was not such explanation the same
which you give in open letter to me ?
Such misstatement as to the law Ger
tainly could not have been intentional
on your part, in order either to mislead
your people or TO sustain you in the un-
tenable position which you have assum-
ed in this matter.
You say the burning of the Conrt
House in March, 1886, eight months af
ter the final settlement for that year
should have been made, and the des-
truction of the returned and rejected
deduction lists by fire at that time, seems
| to me but lame excuse. The law re-
auired that this deduction list should be
submitted and final settlement made
by the Goth July, 1885, for all taxes due
and collectible for the year 1884. If that
was done, there was ample time between
that date aud the burning of the Court
House March, 1885, to have had these
lists corrected and returned to you. In
excusable neglect alone could account,
! in this view, for their loss by fire and
to allow the collector this plea would
give him the benefit of his own negli-
gence. On the other hand, if it was not
submitted on the Goth of July, he failed
to comply with the law, and the same
rule would deny him the right to claim
relief from his own laehes In either
view, it is an explanation that does not
explain"
Again, why misquote the law and thus
do officials an injustice and mislead your
people A few extracts from the laws
will best show the incorrectness of your
position.
Act 10Y of 1884, Sec. 4: "That taz
Collectors and ex -officio tax collectors,
throughout the State, shall be and are
hereby required to seize, advertise and
sell the property upon which Delinquent
taxes are due, on or before the lst day
of MAY, 1885, or as soon thereafter as
possible, and each succeeding year there
after"
In case of State VS.. Viator, Supreme
Court held that the revenue acts re-
auire of tax collectors as conditions pre-
cedent aud essential to the allowance o
deduction lists as credits, that they shal
have sworn to and deposited them in th'
Recorders Office on November 1st o
each year, and that they shall imme
diately proceed to sell the property as
sessed'
Act o6 of 1882, Sec 90: That al
laws providing for the publication o
recording of delinquent lists, b
and the same are hereby repeaIed.a
s. Act 96 of 1882, Sec "a: That all Ia
collectors shall make their final settle
ments with the Auditor of Public Ac
counts and Police Jury within ten day
after the tenth day of January of eac
= YEAR, Same act, Sec 81 That th
Auditor of Public Accounts and Presi
: dents of Police Juries shah not give
certificate of discharge to any coilecto
!. until they are satisfied that the deiin
quent list returned is correct" Frol
: which it will be seen collectors are ne
required to file deduction lists and MAX
final settlements by the Goth July,
: stated by you.
Further comment is unnecessary, ez
cept to cay your premises being wrong
o your conclusions must be incorrect.
As to the collectors delinquent TO
g for the taxes of 1884, it was filed in tn
y Office within the time prescribed by lay
! but returned for correction, as it col
0 tanned large amount of immOvab
q property without sufficient descriptic
:. to enable the collector to advertise an
d sell for unpaid taxes.
1t is safe to say that not one properl
6 in twenty on the rolls of 1884 and lo'
J of your parish is described as require
n by law, and it not being the duty of Il
collector to assume that assessments d
% toriously defective are good, he was il
20 strueted to obtain correct descriptit
of all such property and advertise al
= sell by such Corrected description. >
sec. 65, act SO OF 1882.
10 Deduction lists tOf error, double a
= sessments, taxes OH property sold to Il
iI State, in litigation, and bills for adve
% tising are not allowed until after t
q collector has completed sales of all il
s movable property for unpaid taxes
OF 1t would be an easy matter for the c.
ef lectors throughout the State to Gle
their rolls by selling everything deli
le qaent thereon but, like an indiv.du
* the State wants no property bid IN
st her account unless the description is 81
TO ticie..t and all the formalities of the h
u fully complied with. Otherwise, 8
Z, would acquire property with defectl
title, the original owner would rems
n in quiet possession. she would lose
taxes, and in addition there would
entaiIed upon her large bills for adv
tising aud making deeds. She OF
in wants taxes due her and has adopt
e the only plan authorized by law to c
n, lect them.
id Tf the instructions which were gls
i'd to your collector both before and sii
ial the burning Of the Courthouse are co
as piled with, (which ] have reason to
/ d lieve they will BEL to prepare q
sw with correct description by boundau
NO of all property on which taxes for i
il and 1885 are due aud unpaid, the st
II will either collect the taxes OF aeqU
lis the property
~, vssn sasl- fI.a anaat;nn IS Have van {