Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-09-12
altogether from their old Democratic
comrades.
The es,ly future will tell what this
nomination means. We can say already
tbs, the Democrats have nothing 10 fear
rom il. GEORGE ID. WISE will be
elected by bis usual majority.
Mistakes Corrected.
Messrs. john A. HAMBLEToN Il
Co., in 8 recent circular, say they are
informed nc follows:

Co., in recent circular, say they are
informed as follows. +:
"In 1884 a number OF persons in Rich
mond rendered coupons for taxes. aud, sim
ily standing on their tender. went on with
their business uBdlssutbed by the tax-col-
hector. The Treasurer Of Richmond, Mr..
Tlpsley. informed the Auditor he wished 70
settle his account and asked TOR inslruc-
liens regarding the coupons which had been
rendered and refused The Auditors and
TfeesuIer Of the state consulted together
ard Instructed Mr.. TInsley 10 accept the
coupons and give receipts for the taX-blils.
This Mr.. Tinsiey did. and received coupons
10 The amount OfS3 800. We know OF more
recent cases--one in particulaf-where cou-
poBs have been accepted when presented
and Tecelpted tax. bill given. This action
Of the state ofiicialsw ould iudicste-ln TACT
we hear that such isthe case -that0ny tax
payer who owes enough taxes 20 come un-
fef the jurisdiction of the United States
Court can have his coupons accepted with
out any trouble.
I'VE now know that the state does ac-
cept coupons from large Taxpayers. who
could. ~ the coupons were refused. obtain q
recoipted tax-Dill from the United states
Court"
Messrs. JOHN A. HAMBLEToN &
Co. have been misinformed as to the
above.
Some time last year, after the de-
cision Of the first case Of PARSONS cS.
MARYE by Judge HUGHES, and before
that decision was reversed by the Su-
preme Court in the second case, and
before the passage of the act creating
The Indemnity Board, the Treasurer of
Richmond, under the advice Of the then
Attorney General, received coupons in
pay ment of a sample-merchant's license,
and also, being informed by the Attor-
ney-General that he could not advise
him to levy upon property of those who
had rendered coupons in payment Of
taxes, he RETAINED from levying for
taxes of 1884 to the extent of several
hundred dollars until after the timo
fixed by law for him to settle with the
Auditor for the taxes Of that year
placed in his hands for collection. Ne.
TINsLEY was thus unable to report
said taxes delinquent" because he
could not certify that he had been una
bic to find property upon which to
levy, and he would have been COM
PEELED to pay into the Treasury in
money the amount Of taxes for which
coupons had been so rendered.
In consideration of the fact that Mr..
TINsLEY had been influenced in his &C
ton in this matter by the opinion Of
the Attorney General the Board of In
demnity agreed to receive of Mr.. TINS
LEY the coupons which be had accepted
for the one sample.merchant's license
and those rendered him for taxes OF
1884, amounting to S536.47-not
So, 300 as stated by Messrs. HANDLE
TON & Co. The manner in which this
matter is stated by Messrs. HANDLE.
TON & Co. is calculated to produce the
impression that there has been some
change Of policy and proceedings upon
the part ofthe officers charged with the
collection of the revenue of the State.
The explanation given above shows that
such impression is wholly erroneous.
The only other case in which any tax
collector has received coupons in pay
ment of a tax bill which has come to
the knowledge Of the Auditors or
Board of Indemnity was one in which
a county treasurer in whose hands a
list of lands delinquent for taxes had
been placed for sale received coupons
for the taxes due on one of said tracts.
This he did contrary to the instructions
given him by tho Auditor. He states
that he was induced to do so by the
promise of the taxpayer that he would
take back the coupons and pay the tax
in money il the Auditor refused to re-
ceiye the coupons from him. This
treasurer has been informed that he
will be required to account for said
taxes in money. 1t may be we'll to re-
mark that the person who rendered
these coupons is nonresident
of this State, and that no other
taxpayer of that county has ten
dered coupons for his taxes. The
statement that State officials will
accept coupons from large taxpayers
and refuse the same privilege to the
poor man who owes few dollars
is not only without foundation, but
ridiculous, in view of the fact which
should have been well known to Messrs.
HAMILTON & Co., that the property
of the wealthiest man in the State has
recently been twice levied upon because
of bis refusal to pay his taxes as re-
quired by the law Of his State; and
the assertion that "all the efforts Of
the State to prevent the receipt of cou-
pons for taxes have failed" is still
more strange in face Of the other fact
that the collection Of taxes in money
during the present fiscal year largely
exceeds that of the last fiscal year to
the same date.
The word "elect," in its proper