Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1894-07-19

The recent raise In the assessment OF
real estate in the city of IrontOn is Gre
ating considerable talk and some feel
ing; but the most pronounced objection
is against triple assessments on notes
alleged to have been not listed by GER
tain citizens. While many insist that
with ordinary care in expenditures an
increase in city revenue would not have
been necessary, nearly all have express
ed themselves as being willing to sub
nit to the raise if good reasons were
shown to demand it. But it was the
extraordinarily quiet manner in which
the thing was done that calls for the
loudest objection to the general raise
in valuation. While it is true that the
ordinance in that case made and pro-
yided does not require-as in the case
of state and county-special public no.
tice to be given to the Taxpayers whose
property is affected, yet it seems to US
that where the raise in valuation is so
general. and in many cases so material,
a spirit of fairness would have demand
ed that some Indication of the change
should have been given. The ordi-
nance provides that the assessors book
shall be returned to the council at the
first meeting in June. and, if approved
and accepted. it shall remain in charge
of the council until the next meeting
Tin july, ..Open to the inspection of
all persons interested. But in this
case no person was interested, because
no one suspected the change made in
the valuations. At least two members
of the council were as much in the
dark on this question as those on the
outside, and knew nothing of it until
the day of appeal had gone by. The
book was in possession of the clerk
the whole month, and he said
nothing of the change to anyone, be-
cause, he says, he understood that pub
lie notice was to have been given, and
that the council at its meeting in June
had so agreed and determined upon.
Three members of the council say the
same thing in reference to the triple
Why was not the notice
gwen? 1t occurs to us that justice de-
manded it: for here were three repu-
table citizens in effect charged with
perjury and false return of personal
To condemn them without
even a hearing, we submit, was lit
tie arbitrary, not to question the il
limitable power of the council in this
particular case. There are two sides
to every question, and both ought to be
Mr.. A. Begley is charged
with having failed to return some
s1100 in notes secured by mortgage
the assessor arriving at his knowledge
of the omission by consulting the rec
ords OF deeds and mortgages. The
said records make a mighty clear
prina Jacie case against Mr.. Begley,
and, tried er-parte, he was bound to be
convicted. But when the other side is |
heard the charge vanishes like mists |
before the rising sun. Mr.. b. trans |
ferred these notes to other parties sew
eral years ago. and the records make |
no noe of transfers. The fact of the |
transfers he stands ready to prove, but |
his day of grace" has gone by like a |
zephyr of the night-unknown, and |
lnheeded because unknown-and he |
stands mulcted in taxes on $500 of |
v ich he Is not possessed. The Ordl- |
nance provides that the assessors |
book shall be turned over to the clerk |
1t the July meeting, and he must then
proceed to make up the Textbook, the
council having first determined the
ate Of taxation. After the book is so |
disposed OF. there is no provision for
is revision in any case. and its figures
must stand until the next years as
,essment is made. This being the |
case there is apparently no remedy for |
he hardship inflicted upon the three
men who have been trebly assessed
Messrs. Rieke and Reel claiming, also.
20 have transferred the notes given in
evidence against them by the records.
All this should prove to the city author
ties the truth OF an old adage to the ef-
'ect that it is better to walk upright and |
and go slow than to run fast and STUN
Die. Meanwhile, the trio who have
not been called to the dance will con-
tribute to the purse of the pipers.