The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1891-09-03
THE GROUND RENT FIGHT
THE CASE TO BE CARRIED TO THE
SUPREME COURT.


Adams Advises Adversely to the
,. Acceptance of the Proposition-The
; Matter in the Hands of the Finance
Committee.
The ground rent cases were bstore the
city council again last night. Two inter-
esting documents, one from J. r. Saussy,
ESQ, counsel for the ground renters, and
one from City Attorney Adams in reply
were read and referred to the finance COM
mittee.
Mr. Saussy's letter is as follows:
To the Honorable the Mayor and Aldermen Of
the CITY Of SduGnndh;
In behalf of the holders Of city lots known as
ground rent lots, or lots held under lease from
the City of Savannah, who are contesting the
right OF the city to tax such lots, we are au-
tho-ized to state to you that it is the intention
of these lot holders to have their rights in the
premises ad1udlcated by the court OF final re-
sort, claiming, as they do. that the ordinance
of the city levying tax on these lots In ad'
dition to the ground rent impairs the obligation
of the contract made by the city in the original
lease as construed by the municipal authorities
themselves fer nearly 100 years, questions OF
t5is Character come within the jurisdiction OF
the supreme court OF the United States. and
that court alone can determine It's own Juris-
As some time must eapse in the regular
progress of the case before final Judgment in
the supreme court of the Uuited States can be
reached. aud under the decision of the
state court r, Using Q temporary injunction,
there is now no legal obstacle to the collection.
by the city, Il the disputed tax on these lots;
and in order that the rights OF the holders Of
these lots may be preserved and protected dur
ing the further tendency OF the litigation. and
that the payment of the disputed tax may be
made without prejudice to the right 70 recover
TIE same in the event Of a reversal OF the Judg-
ments Of the state courts, and may also be made
with as little friction as possible, we res pect-
fully request:
First. That by resolution Of council the city
treasurer or other collecting officer be author
ized to receive the disputed tax b sss lots
from the lot holder as paid under protest so that
it shall clearly appear that the tax is not volun-
tarily paid.
Second That the city treasurer be authorized
TO allow the usual reduction for payments that
may be made within fifteen days after due,
though paid under pr test so that so far as al
loving rebate for prompt payment these dis
puted taxes shall be on the same footing as
other taxes.
Third, That in compliapcs with the opinion ex-
pressed by the supreme court of the state
the actual aud true taxable value OF these lots
be ascertained by a re-assessment to be made
IN conformity with that opinion, the court says:
IF that value is any lesS an account of the
subsection of the property TO ground rents or
unpaid purchase money than it otherwise
would be that tact would no doubt be taken
into consideration in making the asse Ssment."
AS that fact was no. taken into consideration
when the assessment was made, and the
court eatertalns no doubt that it will be taken
70 the decision IN the assessment as well as the
lot holders in paying the tax.
We respectfully ask the consideration of
council to those matters. If council arbitrarily
refuse TO arrange for payments under protest it
will not deprive the lot holder from paying
under protest. by waiting until execution is
Issued and levied, as a payment alter issue and
levy OF q Q Il. "a is a payment under prote &,
but an arrangement as suggested secures a
prompt payment of the tax without friction or
surrender OF any right either of the city or the
finally
terminated.
City Attorney Adams reply is as follows:
am in receipt of your note OF the 2ist inst,
enclosing the letter of Saussy & Saussy FSqs ,
IN behalf OF the owners OF the property com
quest from you that Il look into the contents of
this letter and advise council at or before the
next meeting what is advisable and Just under
the circumstance"
In reply beg to say that cannot advise a
compliance with the fret two requests made
namely, that council by resolution authorize its
treasurer or other coll scting officer to receive
the tax on these lots under protest, and that the
treasurer be authorized TO allow the usual re-
duction for payments q ale within the fifteen
days after they are due, although paid under
protest.
In view of the adjudication of the courts of
this stat and the position taken by council and
sustained oy these courts do not see how coun-
Gil can properly or consist ntly do this.
ADVISE against any rcassessment Of tue
property, Us this would bs RECOGNITION that
the assessment already made was not lawfully
made. The decision OF the supreme court does
not hold or Intimate that the course pursued by
court was In any respect unlawful. On tho con
trary, 1t fully sustainS the judgment of the
court below refusing TO interfere with
executions based upon the assessment
which the city had made Of this prop
erty and fully sustains these executions.
Ia sustaining the proposition made by the city,
that this property was taxable according to its
market value, the supreme clurG uses this
language: The real owners of tue money which
these lots would now sell for on the market are
the persons whom we have dssig dated as own
ers, and It Is upon the cash market value that
taxes are assessable, If that value is any less
GA account of the objection OF the property to
ground rents or unpaid purchase money. than
II otherwise would be, that fact wolld no doubt
be taken into consideration in making the as
sassment. Tae marSe: value, Whatever that
may be, is the proper basis" The supreme
court does not here say that this fac; was not
taken into consideration in making tbs assess.
lnent, and could not have done so under the un-
dlsp lted evidence before them. The statement
In the city's verified answer which was before
the supreme court that these lots were
duly assessed for taxation, and according to as
s-ssment, these lots were assessed at the sum of
one million, i've hundred and fifty nine
thousand. four hundred and seventy one dollsr
(Slb59,tiH and defendants say that these lots
he'd as nt.yure, are fairy and justly assessed.
The correctness of this statement was in no
wise challenged, the on complain ut in the petit
ton for injunction bsiug that the asses SINE Mt
was greatly IN excess Of the orr silal vaiu alton
money placed upoI the property when orr IL
nal!y sold Special ami prominent attention
called to this fact, both in the printed brief
handed to the supreme court and in the oral
argument. The court could not, therefore
have suggested that there was any
thing wrong in the assessment, and, as already
noticed, necessarily held that the assessment
valid in sustaining the executions based
thereon. The executions before the court were
for the taxes foT 1890 and were based upon The
assessment for that year.
On the Both day of October. 1889, council
passed resolution providing that the city asses
sors should thereafter include this class OF
property In their ass ;ssment. On tue goth DAY
OF the next month, an ordnance was passed
providing for the assessment OF all real property
which declares that lit shall be tho duty OF said
assessors to assess and value lands and improve
Jnents separately, and at their market value
that is to say for such sum they really be
lieye the property would be reasonably and
fairly worth at private sale" The section theT
goes on to provide for an affidavit TO be male by
each assessor before beginning the work o.
assessing in accordance with this section, AM
which makes it his duty TO assess ground rem
lots and all other property at their market
value The next section OF this ordinance pro
vides that the return Of the assessors shall b,
filed in the Office of the city treasurer for in
spection, and that public notice shall be given
of the filing, which shall specify that objection,
thereto must be fled within thirty days, and
that where objections are not made within the
said thirty days then the assessment and valuo
ton snail be final and shall form the basis OF
taxation for the year 1890"
On the 18th day of Dece nber, 1906, an ordinances
was passed providing that the asse ssrnent mad,
under the previous ordinance should be con