The county record. [volume] (Kingstree, S.C.) 1885-1975, 1901-01-31
PITIFULLY SMALL RETURNS.
Tax Expert Finds Cotton Till Prop.
erty 1uch UndervaIued.

The following report made by an ex-
pert tax official on the most important
matter is Of particular interest just at
this time: it is made to Aiken county
officials:
To Jas. L. Quinby, A. S. Seigler and
w. E. Mealing.
Gentlemen: The board Of equaliza-
ton in March, 1900, appointed you,
with myself to investigate certain re-
turns and make such suggestions to
our representatives as would tend to
equalize more effectually the returns
of manufactures certain portion OF
this work was assigned to me, which
have investigated and beg to report.
l respectfully call your attention to
the report of the Hon. J. P. Derham,
comptroller general, for the fiscal year
1899, page 1877. Under the head OF
Average value Of property appertain-
ing to manufacturing, you will see
that the total value Of all material used
in the State by manufacturers was for
the fiscal year valued at s1,955, ,429. OF
this amount Aiken county returned
$349, 1926 or nearly IS per cent. OF the
entire amount. When you take into
consideration the fact that the only
manufacturing interest in Aiken county
during that fiscal year was confined to
the Graniteville, Langley and Aiken
Manufacturing company's cotton mills,
the return of the State at large, as
shown by the comptroller generals re-
port, Is absurd. Sections 229 and 230
Of the revised statutes provide the
manner Of ascertaining the value Of the
material used by manufacturers and
should have been enforced and not al
low Aiken county, whose spindle ca
pacity Is very small when compared
with other counties throughout the
State, pay IS per cent Of the entire tax
on material used by the manufacture
: ing interest in the State, simply be-
/ SouSC IuCy luShO q JAoI 1CIuiA.
On January l, 1900, there were in op-
Grafton in the State of South Carolina
1,34S,254 spindles engaged in the man
ufacture OF cotton. 4 conservative es-
innate of their cost, on real estate,
mills. machinery; fixtures and tene-
ments would be $40 per spindle, and at
the usual ratio Of 65 per cent for this
class Of property would represent tax
able value of S17,527,302. To this
should be added sundry supplies, stock
in process and materials on hand, or
SO per spindle, giving an additional
taxable value Of s4,044,92S,. or a total
return for taxes for the 1,34S,224 spin.
dies of $21, 1,572, ,264 or a ratio Of SIS for
| taxation.
What do we find? The returns from
13 counties, including Sc corporations
having 1,217,GS7 spindles or fully 80 per
cent. of the States total spindles,
shows only $11,Sl1,4 AIS, or ratio OF
only sS.76 per spindle for all purposes
Of all values, or less than SO per cent.
OF what it should be.
In these returns we find mills re-
turned as low as S4.23 per spindle, and
as high as $20.1S total for taxation.
Forty-three per cent Of the returns
show that they haye paid taxes on ma
teriaIs; 81 per cent. are not taxed on
materials, some mills paid as high aa
( 1915 per spindle on materials, others
OF the 43 per cent. returning material
for taxation returned .05 per spindle Tor
taxes. Three dollars per spindle Is
very conservative estimate for mate
rials: yet the total for material re-
turns for 1,217,07S spindles was $685.
491. and this item should have been, as
shown above, $4,044,962. Now, with
these facts before our representatives,
they can not fail to see that it is nee.
essary to adopt some uniform method
or system for the taxation OF cotton
mills.
NV idea is spindle basis for the en-
tire plants throughout the State, 70
cover real estate and machinery. ana
a sworn statement Of the materials,
stock in process, sundry supplies, etc.,
ttemized from the books Of the corpor-
alton and filed with the auditor, when
other returns are mades and law
making it the duty Of the comptrollet
feneral to see that the law is complle3
with and the proper returns made.
Respectfully submitted,
| DAVE H. WISE.