The Newberry herald and news. (Newberry, S.C.) 1884-1903, 1892-06-29
WHAT DOES ME. ELLEKRE MEAN"
Does He Mean to say that the Auditor and
not Him .elf is Responsible for the
Unlawful Assessment of the
Stock of tho Sewberry
Bank?

The following is taken from The News
aud Courier's report OF the campaign
meeting at Conway on Monday. 1t
would seem that Mr.. Elierhe was pres
ent but did 40; speak. The statement
and challenge Of Mr.. Ellerbe took place
during the speech Of Gov. Sheppard.
Here is what was reported:
"Wllie The question of bank tax
alton WAS being discussed Mr.. Elleroe
came TO the front with the vigorous
assertion that If you will prove to this
crowd that the Comptroller General
has diScrinlinated in one !ota against
The banks Or other corporations in this
State | will Withdraw from this fight
and leave South Carolina. y contro-
versy between Sheppard and f.llefOe
followed the iatlcr asserting he mad
given no instructions for such dlScrlml-
nation. He said in the Newberry
Bank Case the county auditor mao
raised the assessment. Mr.. sheppard
said he would accept Mr.. EllerDc's
statement, but tie assessment had been
raised in violation OF the law, ana II
did not matter to the taxpayer wh"
did it. [Applause. y
- Herald and News is inclined to
think that Mr.. Ellerbe will have to
withdraw from the race, and we tear
leave the State, if he means what we
take his language TO mean.
The readers of The Herald and News
should be familiar with the Newberry
Bank case. The capital stock has been
assessed ut par, though the stock
brought on the market $3.50 to $lG3 per
share-a premium Of $50 to S63 on each
share.
These facts were stated to the Town
ship and County Boards OF assessors
and equalization by Mr. r. l.. Nc
Caughrin, who, by request, appeared
before them. The boards decided that
the return as made by the bank was
high enough in proportion to the return
of other property.
But Mr.. Ellerbe had sent out clrcu-
lars to the effect that banks must return
their stock for taxation at its market
value. The assessments were raised
In the Ne berry case from SloU, ,OOO to
1890, GOO. The bank appealed and the
courts decided that there was no au-
thority in law to increase the assess
ment on property after it had been re-
turned by the owner and passed upon
by both these boards.
The point we want to make Is this:
As we understand Mr.. Ellerbe lie now
desires to makcit appear that the Audi
tor increased the assessment and is re-
sponsible for it and that it was without
any instructions from him (Mr. FL
lerbcl or without his sanction or ap-
proval. Is that what you say or mean,
Mr.. EIlerbe?
Now we want to ask Mr.. Ellerbe If
the auditor Of Newberry did not write
for instructions as to what he must do,
stating the facts in the case, including
the action of the boards? Did not Mr..
Ellerbe reply, per Norton, that if the
president Of the back would say that
the stock was worth SlGO on the
market that the auditor should enter
it upon his tax duplicate at $3.50 ire
spectiye of what the boards had done?
Ifso, then why try to make it appear
that the auditor took it upon himself
to increase the assessment without any
instructions from Mr.. Ellerbe? Does
Mr.. Ellerbe deny that the assessment
was increased by his positive instruc-
tions? 1t has been stated time and
again that the auditor acted under the
advice and instructions of Mr.. El!erbe,
and there has been no denial until now.
The Herald and News has a suspl-
cion that if Mr.. El!erbe denies giving
the instructions upon which the au-
ditor acted that his letters can be pro-
duced, and if lie desires to have his
memory refreshed on this point we will
try to find them for Linn.
The Herald and News is not under
taking to put blame upon any one, but
it desires that the facts may be stated
and the responsibility placed where it
properly belongs.
BE sure to call on Jones when you