The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1896-02-12

poor unfortunate cuss who has good
many outlets in this county will find when
they look over their possessions as pub
lished. in the delinquent tax list in the
Hastings Weekly Gazette. and find that
the clerk of the court, has been looking.
after his spoils; for he and the county
auditor, regardless of law, (see chapt. Y,
laws of 1880, have increased the cost Of
possessions from one hundred to 5000 per
ct. That is to say, if you are the own
er of block of lots, numbering from one
to 30, the law says it shall be published
as one description. Now the auditor of
Dakota county, regardless of his instruc-
tons from the state auditor, instead of
making the list as the law provides where
YOU would only have to pay 20 cents
three-fifths to the clerk and two-fifths to
the GaZette-you will pay $3.50 or 25 cents
lot for so lots. No this is not robbery,
and the auditor is not responsible for it.
Oh. no!
Now the writer being unfortunately
possessed of some 140 descriptions OF
property. went in to pay his taxes on the
23rd day of January and found an adj
dtion of nearly $40 added to his tax as
costs put there on the 21st Of January,
1896. When we called the attention Of the
auditor to the fact that that was not cor
rect, that the law of 1895 had prescribed
the manenr of publishing delinquent lots
Now this auditor Of course knows more
than Bob Dunn the state auditOr-and did
not propose to follow the law or the state
auditors instructions. He probably has
a rake-Off from both the clerk Of court
and publisher: he ought to have If he
don't. There is some talk of making
complaint of malfeasense and non-feas-
ence against some Of the parties inter-
ested.
The writer not being stisfied with the.
acts of the county auditor wrote the state
auditor giving his view of the law and the
facts and received the following reply,
dated Jan. 29th. 1896.
Your understanding of the law is cor
rect and is exactly in accord with the cir
cular of instructions sent by me to the
county auditor a few weeks ago, a copy
of which l enclose herein. l would sug
gest that you at once call upon
your county auditor and it is more than
probable that the matter can be satsfact-
orally adjusted.
r. C. DUNN, State Auditor.
So the next morning. armed with the
state auditors letter and the copy of the
law with the state AUDITORS recommended
lions, I called upon the county auditor
and was met in a very unseeing manner
because I claimed right to protect my
self from this unlawful listing of property
and made expressly in the interest of the
clerk of the court and the publisher Of
the tax list. But, nevertheless. ] filed
written protest. against the publishing Of
my tax except according to law.
Now the state auditor says he has done
all he can do. That the circular to the
county auditors was made and submitted
to the attorney general, and it met with
his hearty approval and if county auditors
see fit to disregard instructions it is a
matter for the courts to pass upon. What
must the result be? Why, the delinquent
publication will be illegal: the county will
be charged with at least $3.50 by the clerk
Of the court; and by the publisher $500 or
o 10
will amount to, making not less than ST.
200 or 81 500 sucked out of this county,
expressly for the personal eXchequer of
these two parties, except what the rake
off may be for the auditor.
OF course all this is on the SuppositiOn
that the board of county commissioners
allow the full bill as per descriptions IL
legally published. and the bills are not
appealed from; but there is no danger
about the appeal. More than 500 people
are directly Interested in this robbery
for every man that owns two or more
lots are robbed of from 25 cents to 1925
in proportion to how many they may
have; and the writer hereof will do all he
can to have this robbery squelched-and
every one who is personally interested is
most earnestly requested toh clip him with
their names in this protest.
That the papers Of this county are using
their combine to good effect with our
county commissioners is shown from the
fact that one gets the advertisement at 10
cents per description; another the financ-
ial statement at Is cents per folio, with
$50 for 500 pamphlets; and another so
cents a folio for board proceedings and all
other printing at legal rates; while it is
supposed the other papers of the county
get rake off for keeping their hands
off; and from every look at the bills al
lowed by the county board they do not
care for expenses, even though it should
become necessary to issue orders paying
interest to pay the bills so generously al
lowed. HARVEY GILLETT.
Hastings, Mimi, Jan. 81.