The Mitchell capital. (Mitchell, Dakota [S.D.]) 1879-1918, 1895-08-23
ABOUT THE COSTS
DR.. BraCey Writes Concerning the Costs
in the Recent Reduction in Assess
ment Cases.
He Believes No Barrier Should be Placed
in the Way for a Man to
Secure Justice. ...
THE COMMISSIONERS
Something in Regard to The Railroad
Commission Of South Dakota.
What They Are Doing.
ON THE COSTS OF THE CAS-:
DIR. Bracy Gives His Views on the Costs
of the Assessment Cases.

Dr. Bracy Gives His Views the Costs
of the Assessment Cases.
EDITOR REPUBLICAN-In your We'd
nesday's issue appeared an article un-
der the heading City Gets Benefit"
which, coupled with expressions have
heard from citizens, impresses me with
the fact that these legal proceedings
for the reduction of excessive assess
ments are not we'll understood. The
judgment of the court seems to be
looked upon as calamity which has in
an evil hour fallen upon our fair city,
to blight its future prosperity. The
judges verdict has been questioned,
bhe city attorney belittled and the
plaintiffs assailed as conscienceless
despoilers of the city's treasury.
The facts are that Judge Haney's de-
cision was remarkable for its conser
vatism; Attorney Goodykootz managed
the case we'll, and got all out there was
in it for the city, and Messrs. Scott
and Van Fps were reluctantly forced
to appeal to the law for protection from
eXtortion, after their protests and petit
tions had failed to procure them relief:
and no one can claim that their esti-
mate Of values as given in their testi-
mony was not liberal for the city.
What has the city lost by these deci
sions? True she has lost the right Ill
she ever had it) to eXtort beyond :
reasonable limit taxes upon class O.
unproductive property. Yet she is
still permitted to assess it for its full
if not double its value. Could we ask
! more? And OF the property involved
in the transaction there is not enough
to effect, perceptibly, the rate of taxa
ton. No municipality can afford to b'
unjust to its citizens or taxpayers. On,
of the blessings of which, as freemen
| we boast. is that our laws when fairl,
: administered protect every citizen fron
| oppression. If the assessor errs i
judgment Or discriminates unfairl
: against the property OF any taxpayer
= a board of equalization sits for the pul
Y pose OF fixing values and adjustin
t differences. When a taxpayer feel
= that he has been unjustly dealt wit
r by the assessor he has the right {
d petition to the board for redress, an
) should his petition be rejected, he hs
the right of appeal to the court. He,
both sides are heard, through the
witnesses, and a careful judgmel
d rendered. Now if a man feels that he
/ wronged in his assessment and, throue
d the ignorance or preverseness of
n majority of the board of cqualizatlo
d his wrong is not righted, he appea
le from its action and the judicial verdi
n proves that he is right and the assess
er and board are wrong. why should he
O. saddled with costs in an action again
le the city, more than against an indivi
,h ual? This may be law but it is n
ne justice. 1t is akin to the old Engli
a decree that man should pay for
in shillings and be hung. In the artit
ty referred to you say 'this is point
k fovor of the city and will have t
or effect Of making man hesitate befc
commencing suit against the city in
similar case" So you would handle
freeman by-a overweight of cos
le- to prevent him from entering the re
'et against the city for his rights
er more effectual method would be
he abolish the board of equalization a
lal all laws for his relief and make I
of taxpayer take his medicine as it
U.S. dealt out to him by the despotic ha
ca OF the assessor. Bless you this ris
lily OF appeal Is the treeman's protect
ad. franchise against the power of desE
ch ism, and should be guarded as
he apple Of his eye.