Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1900-05-09

The State Board of Equalization and
Appeals met yesterday in the rooms
of the Board of County Commission
ers, for the purpose of hearing state
ments from the Pan Handle counties
relative to erroneous assessment.
There were present Hon. j. w. Heay-
ner, OF Buchannon, president Of the
Board; Col Thomas O'Brien, of Wheel
ing; Col. R. P. Chew, of Charles Town,
and Hon. NJ. R. Lowther, of Parkers-
burg. Peter Silman, of Charleston,
the fifth member of the Board was alb
sent Edwin NJ. Keatley, of Charles
ton, secretary of the Board, attended
the session.
The Board met in the morning and
promptly adjourned, as the spokesmen
for Ohio county citizens were not
present. Col O'Brien conducted the
visiting members about the city and
took them out along the line of the
Wheeling & Elm Grove railway. Al
the close of the afternoon session he
took them on the street cars to the
lower end OF Benwood. During these
trips, number of pieces of property
were pointed out as examples OF the
valuation placed upon Ohio county
property in the recent re-assessment.
The Board assembled in the after
noon, and were waited upon by the
committees from the Chamber of Com
merce and Board of County Commits
sioners. Gen. Alfred Caldwell and Hon.
N. E. Whitaker addressed the Board
on behalf of the taxpayers OF
Wheeling and Ohio county.
These gentlemen did not take the
ground that the valuation placed up
on Ohio county property was higher
than it's actual worth. They conced-
ed that it was fair, but was all out of
proportion to the valuation placed up
on property in other counties. Ohio
county citizens felt that their aggregate
valuation should be decreased. and
some other counties increased. Ohio
county has been paying much more
than her share of State taxes for
years, and if the present assessments
are permitted to stand the evil will
be increased.
After an informal talk during which
some interesting facts were developed
Col Chew suggested that the fault lay
in the present State law. In the first
place it provides miserable pay for
the work, and it is impossible in many
counties to have the re-assessment
conducted properly for $500, the
amount limited by the statute. The
law is also faulty in that 1t does not
give the State Board authority to in
crease the aggregate. The work OF
equalization can only be done by TAX
ing from one county and adding to an
other. The valuation in Ohio county
is conceded to be fair. In other coun-
ties it is known to be unfair. The
law ought to make it possible to have
fair assessment in every county in
the State.
Some interesting comparisons were
made in the room during the progress
of the meeting 1t was stated, for eX-
example, that the valuation OF
the City Bank of Wheeling
was greater than the aggregate
Of all the banks in Charleston
| The valuations in Kanawha have been
| very low, Wood county little higher
and Ohio county the maximum eX-
IRENE.
A particularly fragrant example OF
the inadequacy of the State law is
+! furnished in Tyler county. 1t was
| found impossible to have the reassess-
ment done for $500, and the County
Court refused to appropriate the other
| S700 asked for the work. The 1892
| figures were therefore copied, and re-
turned as the 1900 assessment. In the
| former year the valuation of Sisters
vile property was $171 600. 1t has not
been changed, yet it is conceded that
the aggregate valuation of property in
| that town to-day exceeds $4,000, 600
Tyler county furnishes a case, there
| fore in which it is difficult, if not i'm
possible to equalize the assessments
Farm lands are valued at $50 TO ST.
an acre, which very closely approx
mates their actual value. If the State
Board increases the Tyler aggregate
100 per cent, it will be seen that tbs
| farmers will suffer, while Sistersvillt
property will still be much lower thar
q fair valuation for taxation purposes
1t was suggested by Senator Whit
aker that the next Legislature SHOULD
enact proper law, providing for an
other reassessment next year, am
this idea appeared to find favor witt
the Board.
Ohio county was passed for the tins
being, to hear a statement from Mr.. ]
7. Roseberry, assessor for the upper
| district in Marshall county. He was
invited by Col. O'Brien to make g
statement to the Board. Mr.. Roseberry
stated that he had lowered the figure:
in the agricultural districts, because
he ascertained that farms sold under
the hammer for less than their ap
praised value. Mr.. Roseberry state
that he had substantially increased th'
valuation in the towns. The Nationa
| Tube Works had been increased 500,
| 600. He thought the increase in his
district would be ten per cent. but i
was only five per cent. In Moundsville
he thought the former valuation;
were fair. and his work was principally
| equalization. The County Clerk hat
told him there were no complaints il
| Marshall county.
From which we are at liberty to in
fer that they were not hurt, suggested
Col O'Brien.
They were not hurt" replied Mr.
Roseberry. Col. O'Brien suggested thai
| the committee accompany Mr.. Rose