The Newberry herald and news. (Newberry, S.C.) 1884-1903, 1892-02-17
The NEWBERRY BANK WINS,
DECISION IN IT'S FAVOR HY THE sO-
PREaiE C0U3st.
Action OF ths Lower Court Sfnrin'" III" @
Writ OF Mandamus GTanf+'i. E''-
lerbe Hors do Combat.
fThe State, 18th

las been decided by the olate 0"p
Court, and Comptroller General EiIeToe
has been completely showed under in his
high-handed method ofraising the bank
taxes
The decisions were rendered by Acting
Associate Justice 7. B. Fraser and the
full court corcurs therein. It IS some
what of blow to the new Attorney Gen
eral. They we're fled in the Office OF the
clerk of the court yesterday, al belo"
The State presents them in full, in view
of their importance and uotoriety.
Ofcourse the State government has
little to say yet They are evidently
waiting for the decision in the Marlboro
bank case, in which the auditor regularly
and in accordance with the law sum-
moued the witnesses and then raised the
assessments. If this IS decided In favor
ofthe State before the 2oth, then there
will be time for the Newberry Auditor
to take evidence and increase the banks
assessment in the case as the statute d.
rects. IF the Marlboro bank wins, then
5 the comptroller will have to take back
seat.
TEXT OF THE OPINION IN THE TREAS
URER'S CASE.
The State of South Carolina, ex parte the
National Bank of Newberry, S. c., VS..
Calhoun F. Boyd, as County Treasurer
ofNewbery CONTEMPLATION for man
damus- Opinion by T. B. Fraser, acting
associate justice.
This case, an original application to
the Supreme Court, and the case Of the
State of South Carolina sx rslat;one the
National Bank of Newberry VS.. Wallace
c. Cromer, as County Auditor for the
County of Newbery, petition for manda-
mus, being an appeal from the Judgment
and order Of His Honor Judge Hudson,
on circuit, were heard together.
These cases grew out Of the same mat
ter and involved discussion of the same
principles. The second case is against
the auditor, while this one is against the
treasurer; and it is claimed that the facts
as set out and admitted to be true in the
case of the auditor, and now In this
-couuo appeal, are modified by state
ments made in the case against the treas
urer
Separate judgments will therefore be
fled in the two cases. A reference to
the other case will show all the facts, ex-
cept so far as they are modified by the
statements herein made. The return of
the bank for the fiscal year, commencing
Nov I, 1890, was duly made and sworn
to by the president of the bank, in which
the personal property was valued at $780,
900, and on which the tax was $7,o25.
This return was passed without objection
by the township board and approved by
the county board, and was received by
the auditor without objection. Subse-
quently the said personal property was
placed by the auditor on his tax list and
his tax duplicate at valuation of $780,
900, and charged with tax of S., los.
In the case against the County Auditor
now before this court on appeal it was
admitted that this increase in valuation
was made solely on the order Of the comp
troller general. The return of the treas
urer alleges 'that while the said county
auditor believed that he had been Or
dered by the comptroller-general Of the
State to raise the valuation of the personal
property Of the petitioner.
That the said auditor was not actually so
directed to do;" but was directed to fol-
low the general instructions contained in
Circular No 1912 and that these in
structions on the part of the comptroller
general, and this action on the part of
the county auditor in raising said valu-
alton, resulted from the information
which both of these officers had received.
That the said return as made by the Pc
titiener was below the true value in
, money of the property so returned"
This statement and the returns has not
been traversed and must be assumed to
be true. It is also All admitted fact that
the tax duplicate now in the hands of the
treasurer was turned over to him before
the writ of mandanus was issued to the
2uditor in the other case heard with this.
The application to this court is for
writ of uandamus commanding the
treasurer to correct the said tax dupli-
cate in his hands, to enter the value of
the said personal property at $3.50, 900,
and to enter the tax payable on the same
for the said fiscal year at $2, ,o25, so as to
correspond with the tax duplicate now
held by the said county auditor; or if
your honor should hold that such said
correction should be made by the said
county auditor for the said county, CON-
manding the said county treasurer to
suffer the said county auditor to make
said correction
The order and judgment of Judge Hud-
son, under which the said writ Of man
damus was issued, have on appeal been
this day affirmed by this court. That
writ commanded the auditor to correct
his duplicate. The auditor notified the
treasurer of the contents Of the writ, au-
thorized him to make the correction in
the treasurer's duplicate, and verbally re-
.quested him to allow him, the said au-
ditor, to make the said corrections, either
of which the treasurer declined to do.
This case against the auditor having been
brought on appeal to this court, and it
having been definitely decided, that upon
the state of facts appearing in that case
the corrections should be made, and the |
required corrections having been made in