The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1899-01-01
AUDITORS DEPARTMENT
Auditor Aver Says Its Usefulness is lmparef
by Lack of Clerical Force.

state Auditor aver, III MS loFtHconiiHS
report to the Legislature, will recon-
mend an increase of the clerical force
in his office Touching this matter and
the work of the department. Mr.. Aver
will say:
1T can be positively asserted that
the Auditors Department has never had
proper appreciation from the General AS.
sembly, nor has it ever been sufficiently
provided for in the matter of clerical
force. The duties imposed on 1t by law
are much more onerous than those OF
any other State department, and its
possibilities, with an organization neces-
sary to fully perform those duties, are
far more extensive than any other. II
is evidently designed to be the key for
discovering and opening up channels for
public revenue under legal regulation.
as well as to keep an account of the
same; but a full working out of details
which would prove advantageous In
either purpose can never be reasonably
hoped for with such forces as can be
commanded under existing conditions.
Evidences have been noted by the pres
ent incumbent of salutary purposes and
plans, begun by former Auditors, which
apparently had to be abandoned for want
of adequate assistance to carry them to
completion.
"A moderately fair consideration of the
department in its relation to the public
service would result in the legal estab
lishment of an additional clerkship. and
if it he desirable that its equipment
should approximate that of correspond
ing departments in other States, legal
provision should also be made for q
stenographer. The salary of the CHIEF
clerk should not be less than 1000 PEI
annum.
s'1'he volume of business, now conduct
ed by the department would not he I'M
dertaken by any banking house or well
organized business concern with less
than two or three times the present force
working during customary business
hours"
At another place in his report Mr.
Aver has this to say:
''There is growing demand for an
approximate knowledge of the annual
product of stable commodities in the
State, such as cotton. corn, wheat. to-
bacco, peanuts. etc. While the acquire
ment and tabulation of such informa-
ton may more properly belong to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics than to this
Department, the information could be
collected and reported by the same ma
chinery employed for listing property
for taxation. and the reports of taxable
property made to the Auditor could in
clude the reports of products"
The general idea on which the reve-
nue. system of this State is based is
that, in order to tax equitably, it is ne
cessary to tax practically everything;
beginning with real estate, and including
specifically live stock, farming utensils,
household and kitchen furniture, money.
credits of every character, checks. ac-
counts, certificates of deposit, invest
ments, stocks, bonds, etc, etc, and final
E making a clean sweep by requiring
listing for taxation of s'all other prop
erty whatever A description of the
system may be summed up by the desig-
nation General Property Tax" 1t may
be possible to secure a reasonably fair
listing of such personal property as live
stock, bicycles farming utensils. kitchen
furniture, fire arms, etc, because such
property is tangible and visible and I'M
der a vigorous regime could not escape
detection; but the same effect that
would put this property on the tax
books would fail signally in discovering
and listing such property as money,
credits, notes, investments, accounts.
checks and the like. The matter of
by which this species of property can be
brought from its hiding and be made to
pay its just proportion of taxes, is sub
ject which has been much discussed,
and might be discoursed on almost in
definitely. 1t has been matter of more
concern and trouble to the trainers of
revenue acts, the country over. than all
other subjects combined. Many States
have adopted very stringent laws. with
view to compelling a full listment of
what is commonly included in solvent
credits, but no law seems to have ever
been successful in accomplishing the end
sought. Our own law is perhaps as
stringent as any concerning the failure
or refusal to make a proper return, but
there is no machinery to ascertain
whether or not such proper return is
male. We could illustrate by citing
the fact that in this State an individual
who makes false return of property
of any kind, may be held guilty of
perjury. This appears simple and com
paratively harmless to the casual read
er, but our penal code prescribes as
punishment for perjury a fine which
amounts to $1,000 and Imprisonment in
the county jail or penitentiary of not
less than four months or more than
ten years. This provision of the law.
however, seems to have no terror to tax
pages generally, for no case can be cited
in this State of a person charged with
perjury in making tax returns, and no
machinery is provided to discover wbeth-
er or not the taxpayer is ever guilty
of perjury within the meaning of this
provision.
Massachusetts provides for the fraud
ulent listing and return of property, a
specific punishment of a fine of $1,000
and Imprisonment one year.
Pennsylvania imposes punishment
of fine not exceeding $500, imprison-
ment and solitary confinement at labor
for seven years, and perpetual djsquali
fication as witness in any matter or
controversy.
Missouri imposes fine of three times
the amount of tax that would be due on
a true return, and punishment the
same as that for perjury.
Kentucky provides punishment of a
fine of 5000 and a payment of three
times the amount of tax upon the reel