The Cape Girardeau Democrat. (Cape Girardeau, Mo.) 1876-1909, 1895-02-02
STATE OF MISSOURI.
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT,
JEFFERSON CITY, Jan. 81, 1885.

EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT ?
~IEFTERSoS CITY, jan q, 1885.
To the House Of Representatives.:
The following resolution, adopted by the
house of representatives, has been transmitted
TO me:
"ResoIred by the house Of Representatives of
the Thirty-eight general assembly:
That the governor, as the principal member
OF the board of equalization. be requested, at
his earliest convenience. to inform this house
why the state board of equalization, when they
found ii necessary to increase the taxable
wealth OF the state, placed an additional value
OF S6o,OOO.UOO upon the farm property of the
state, instead Of increasing the taxable wealth
Of the railroads until railroad property shall
bear its equitable share of taxation. as directed
TO do by the resolution passed by the house of
representatives of the ThIrty-seventh general
assembly, and to be found at page $40 of the
House Journal.
The most significant feature Of this resoIu-
ton is the assertion that the state board Of
equalization at its last meeting placed an ad-
ditional value of s65, 600, 900 upon the farm prop
erty OF the state" Acting upon miSinforma-
ton, the house has been unwittingly misled
into making a statement which is without
foundation in fact, and, proceeding from that
premise, has been betrayed into an unwar-
ranted criticism of the state officials.
1t is not true that the state board
Of equalization at its last meeting
placed an additional value OF S65,-
LOO. 90 upon the farm property of the state. Nor
was any such thing done at all. The resolu-
ton, therefore, is predicated upon a mistake
in fact. In view of that 1 might, with perfect
propriety and without the least discourtesy.
dismiss the matter without further considera-
ton: but inaSmuch as it has been brought to
the attention OF your honorable body. it may
not be amiss for me TO state some facts peril
nent to the subject, which may prove both use
full and interesting.
The aggregate assessment of real and per-
sonal property made in 1898 amounted to $50
S53,S03. That was exclusive of such railroad,
bridge and telegraph property as is assessed by
the state hoard and llSn nf certain Nrnnarf -
belonging to merchants and manufacturers. as
sesSed under special statutes. According to
the abstracts of the assessors books for the
year 1884, the real and personal properties Of
the state were assessed at $685. ,279. $40. That
was an increase made by the assessors over the
assessments of 1893 of S32L925.537. This ASSESS
ment for 1894 was further increased by the
state board OF equalization S37.0l6,7l2 Adding
the increase by the ~tate board to that made by
the assessors, it Will be seen that the final as
SeSSment OF real and personal property for 1894
was increased over that Of 1898 by S69 81. 2Ig.
That embraces the assessment upon real estate
in both town and country, including wild or
uncultivated lands, and all descriptions of per-
sOnal property, with the exceptions above al
luded to.
OF the So. OPS 81 increase made in 1894 by the
local assessors, S29,100,l45 fell upon three mu-
inequalities, namely, st. Louis city and St.
Louis and Jackson counties, leaving only
$3,765, 3S2 of that increase to be distributed
among all the other cities. towns and coun-
ties of the state. OF the 37.O16.1i2 increase
made in 1894 by the state board of equalization,
SIS, IL, $50 fell upon acre prOperty-that is, upon
gardens. farm and wild lands. OF the remain
der, S6,G23 AS fell upon city and town lots, and
S2,S20,61l upon personal property. Eliminating
personal property, which is divided between
town and country, from the discussion. it will
De seen that the additional value placed upon
farm or acre property by the state board of
equalization, instead of being S65,OOl,OOJ, was
about S2S,OO0,OO0.
In this connection it is well to note the i'm
portant and interesting fact that the increase
made in 1884 in the assessed value Of real eS-
tate in the two cities of St. Louis and Kansas
T.u 70 .,l . liz. naNna1 . n sIA s~a.anEA.
made for that year on all the balance OF the
real estate in all the cities, towns and counties
of the state. BY many it is contended that city
real estate is assessed relatively much higher
than acre property. This | do not admit. and
vet l I'm not prepared. with the data at hand,
wholly TO deny it. know ii mas been the earn
est desire of the state board to treat all alike.
and they have endeavored to secure as great
equality as the nature of the case would ad-
nit. The aggregate amount of taxes paid up
on city and town lots is much larger than that
paid upon acre property. The total assessed
valuation placed upon farm or acre property in
1894 amounted to s3O6,e2O,Ofs, while that placed
upon city and town lots was 1887 ,1OO,6O9. The
excess of the assessment on city and town
realty over acre property was sso7SO,56l;
amounted to 81 1885, or this tax there Was
levied upon acre property, in round numbers.
the sum of 100000, and the remainder OF nearly
1000 600 was levied upon city and town lots.
The aggregate tax imposed upon city and town
realty was about 30 per cent. greater than that
collected from acre property. 1t is undeniably
true that a much larger total revenue is derived
from city real estate than from country real
estate; but l am nor prepared on that account
to admit that the assessed value Of city prop
erty is relatively higher than in the country.
Notwithstanding there may seem to be some
apparent reason for that contention.
CAUSE Oh THE INCREASE.
The increases made by the state board re-
suited inevitably from the effort to equalize
valuations between the several counties of the
state. II is the business OF the board to equal
ize assessments, not between individuals or TIE
subdivisions OF counties, but between the coun-
ties themselves. 1t was created for that our
poes. Its very name indicates the purpose for
which it was established. Sec. 1914 Of tn: Re
vised Statutes expressly requires the 'ttG;e
board to equalize valuations between counties:
first, by adding to the valuation of the property
in each county which may believe to be below
its true value in money such per centum as will
raise il to its true value; ana. secondly. by de-
Quoting from the valuation in each county
which they believe to be above the real value
in money. such per centum as will reduce the
same to its true value. II the property III each
county is to bear its Just proportion of the
common burden. then equalization in ASSESS
gments is absolutely essential. and if the mem
.berS of the state board are to observe their
obligations to enforce the law. they can not eS-
cane the duty of making an honest effort to
aeQualize values as nearly as may be practical
BILE.
TIE local assessments for 1894. as returned
to the state board. disclosed the grOSSeSt in
eQualitieS, and If they had been permitted TO
stand, great injustice would have eventuatcd
to HIany counties and the board been derelict
in the discharge of u plain and positive duty L
will give several examples by way OF lluStra-
tion. Farm or acre property in AtchiSon coup-
ty. in the northwestern part of the state. was
valued by the assessor at SLIGO per acre. while
that of the adjoining county OF NOdaway
was assessed at S9.3T. Every member of
the house familiar with those counties
must know that the lands of AtchiSon county
should not be assessed at s. per acre above
those of Nodaway. Both are splendid counties.
but L venture the opinion that the real estate
OF Nodaway is at least as valuable as that of
Atchison, but the lands of AtchiSon were as
sessed about ~ per cent. higher than those of
NodaHay. Here, then, was manifest Unequal
ity. But to secure equality. it was necessary
either to lower the valuation OF one or raise
that of the other. or to do both.
1t was in evidence before the board from
weil-informed citizens o. AtchiSon county, en-
brssinC county officials. that the lands OF that
county were not assessed above. but far below
their real value. There was no reason there
fore for reducing the valuation OF the assessor.
Accordingly the board left Atchison county I'M
changed and added 20 per cent. to the yalua-
ton placed upon the lands of Nodavay by the
assessor of that county. This resulted is rails
ing the Nodaway lands TO Sll.2i per acre, leay-
ing those of Atchison at sII.20. Was not that
increase proper:
For 4 similar illustration in the southwest
ern section of the state. l will instance the
counties of Barton and Vernon The assessor
O. of Barton county valued the lands of that cOun-
ty ct s.. SO per acre. while those Of Vernon were
valued at S6.e9-a difference of nearly 81 per
acre. But every southwestern member knows
that the money value Of the lands OF Vernon