The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-05-05

purpose and known as TIE tar Judgment
sale, redemption and forfeiture record. shA
aiss o. 0e4anQaent lands or lots. which shall
De male our In numerical order.
Prior 70 the act Of Isse srA s~sass<--, nad
prevailed In this state OF assessing an
real estate owned By any Individual 20
taca srsdfsiGuAI IN a group. no numerical
tiSs Whatever being prepared: also 20 as
sez several lots or tracts A. IFE-au sum
This practice was found 20 Be highly In
convenient ard 20 result IN many cases
IN p.ac1ng the administration OF The revs-
nus Department IN chaotic Confusion. II
coulc ro' bv. happen that e4e assessor
IN thus grouping propsrty would often in
sIn1e IN an assessment against an frsstf-
Fs1oal some Tracts OF Lard whaci betonges
10 otner individuals. and. as 10 separate
assessment was made OF the <ss~Arer,
traess. the treasurer had 10 adequate
method % aFFortiontng the taxes among
me several taxpayers vho each desired
20 pay the portion OF the tax UPON the
land which he owned
10 more frequently happened when an
sonlFldual owned great many lots or
tracts OF Hand at the time the assoc sr.s-,t
vas made ne had between that date and
ne cate when the taxes became due sold
toe 1i1erenf tracts or lots to many differ
EFT persons, In which case the same Glfsl-
cnity OF arEortfoning the tSxes arose
The absence OF a numerical index fur
fher complicated matters in this way:
when taxpayer spplisd 20 the Office %
the treasurer TO pay his taxes on a partic-
uiar piece % property the treasurer had
no msthod Of finding such tract or lot
upon hts tax roll Unless he knew 20 whom
u had been listed. IN which case he Nigh.
turn 70 the alphabetical list OF owners
or supposed owners and ascertain, often
with considerable labor. what such tract
was assessed al. II further resulted In
numerous omissions Of considerable tracts
OF land from the tax list and the double
and triple assessments Of the same tract
fo several supposed owners in this county
the same tract OF land having thus been
assessed four times In a single year 10
four different owners
ITO correct these evils the legislature
provided IN the first place that the real
estate IN the county should be listed In its
numerical order so that The several officers
charged with the administration of this
branch OF the public service might at any
time turn with facility 70 the description
OF any tract upon which the taxpayer de-
sired 20 pay his taxes. 1t also provided
that all real estate should be listed sc-
cording 20 the smallest legal subdivision
which. I'm the case OF farming lands.
means forty-acre tract or a lot as dsseg.
mated in the public surveys. and in the
case OF city property that each lot shall
be listed and valued separa tely. And with
this system prevailing IL made no material
difference how many transfers were made
OF any particular lot or tract. In this
way the treasurer when collecting taxes
had basis furnished han by the tax roll
FOR ascertaing how much the then owner
should pay on any particular piece OF
property.
ibid the legislature by adding the words
OF the proviso intend TO render uugaeory
a ~ n ssF
1898 made over the old SYSTEM I cannot
find any language ia the amendments
made BY the last legislature which tusu-
fees me IN answering the above question
I'm the ALTERNATIVES In the first place the
act OF 1895 repeats the first provision or
section a requiring the lists OF tracts and
lots separateiy I'm the very words OF the
act or 1875. And II the legislature had m
tended 10 abolish the rule then laid down
Il Is Incredible that Il would have re-
peated the exact language OF that provi-
eion without change | am. therefore. OF
the orsnion that IL is still the duty OF the
assessor 10 value and list each lot or tract
o. land separately. as provided In the first
clause Of section g. To what extent, then
may sew s.ral lots or tracts OF land belong
insy 10 a single individual be grouped with
out rendering the provision with references
to separate assessments and numerical
order nugatory. and again involving the
administration or tne revenue lANs III the
same disorder that prevailed prior to these
refornafsonss II must be apparent that
no one In advance can anticipate all the
conditions and circumstances that may
arSze when Il e. attempted 70 put this pro-
vision into active operation II may be
found practicable 20 group property under
certain circumstances without abroga8ng
the other beneficial provisions Of the law.
and as II IL manitestiy impossible for any
one TO say in advance Just what grouping
NAV he done under all circumstances. l
will have 20 content myself with suggest
snr what. In my opinion. cannot be done
In the case OF farming lands do not think
~ would he practicable 70 group tracts
which are not in the same section. or In
the case OF city property lots which are
not In TIE same block, but when the treas
urer comes 20 make out the record pro
yide-i for In section I0i I cannot see how
such grouping can he done so as 20 result
IA any substansial benefit. For he must
r,~enare this record Of lands or lots in<1u-
ruerical order And as I understand the
meaning OF that term "a used IN The law
he must commence, for instance. WITH
block OF addition placing lot az ne
FIRST description OF the block and follow
Ins. with each other rot according 20 Is
Number. I confess that 7 am unable 20
see how the provisions OF section q with
reference 70 grouping can be given any
substantial effect without rendering u NJ
.erlv inconsistent with the other provi-
sgon= II The same section requiring each
tract 70 be assessed separately ard the
list 70 be made out in numerical order.