The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-06-09
Treasurer Lee, of Shelby County, Re-
fuses to Make a Statement I'm
til Ferrets' Pay Is Deducted.
WILL MAKE FORMAL DEMAND
SUPREME COURT MAY BE ASKED TO
REVIEW THE NATTER.
The Appellate Court Has Already Held
that Contracts with Tax Ferrets
Are Not Legal.

The Appellate Court of Indiana has held
that boards of county commissioners have
the right to make contracts with tax-fer-
rets whose business ii Is to drag to light
sequestered taxes. The court has not
passed on the question as to whether the
State is required to pay share Of the
commission due these tax collectors. 1t is
that point that will likely have to be set
tied in the near future as the result of
disagreement between the State auditor
and the treasurer of Shelby county as to
whether the State should pay any part OF
these commissions
Captain Lee. Shelby county's treasurer.
was here yesterday prepared to make a
settlement with the State. He wanted.
however, to deduct part of the amount on
account of commissions Shelby county has
paid tax ferrets for work in that county.
Treasurer Lee insisted that the State
should pay the commission of 30 per cent.
on the amount the State gets as a result
of the tax ferrets' work. This commission
in the Shelby county case would amount
to about $3.50 The auditor, on the advice
of the attorney general, declined to allow
this amount deducted and Captain Lee re-
fused to pay unless the amount was de-
Quoted.
The attorney general holds that the
State is not required to pay any part Of
this tax ferret commission. Captain Lee,
with his attorney, Frank L. Littleton, of
this city, was at the Statehouse yester-
day evening talking over the matter with
Auditor Sherrick, who still refused to ac-
cept a settlement with anything deducted
on account of collecting sequestered taxes.
Lee insisted on deducting go per cent. on
all State money collected by the ferrets
except school funds.
FORMAL DEMAND TO-DAY
At o'clock Lee and his attorney left with
the understanding that they would return
to-day and make formal demand on the
auditor to settle in the manner detailed.
II is understood that test suit Is likely
to be brought to settle the matter. 1t is
the opinion of the attorney general that
counties cannot bind the State to pay this
commission. The question is of consider
able interest over the State as about twen-
ty-fve or thirty counties have been en-
ploying these tax experts. Charles w.
Welman. of Sullivan, who is now engaged
in looking up back taxes in Delaware coun-
ty, was at the auditors office yesterday
evening and being tax ferret" himself
is naturally greatly interested in the
1t is suggested that great deal Of time
and trouble could be saved IL county treas
urers would settle in full with the auditor.
pay the full amount collected by tax fer
rets due the State with the. commission
paid under protest. They would then be
In position to file their claims in the proper
court and recover the amount II the court
should hold that the State is liable for its
share of the tax ferrets' commission.
1t is pointed out that in the case involv-
ing the legality of tax ferret contracts.
which went up from Park county to the
Appellate Court, an appeal could have been
taken to the Supreme Court, where the
whole question could have been finally set
| tied.
ILLEGAL IN WISCONSIN.
IT is asserted that the tax laws of wiscon-
sin are similar to those of Indiana and that
in test case before the Supreme Court of
that State the court held that such con-
tracts were illegal and that the State could
be held for no part of the tax ferrets' COM
mission. The Indiana Appellate Court de-
clared these contracts to be legal about
six months ago. Since that time tax fer
rets have been very active in this State.
with the hope that the court Of final re-
sort would also hold that the State should
pay it's share of the commission. In fact
many boards of county commissioners have
| let contracts on this theory. Should Captain
Lee decide to go into court to test his point
| 1t is probable that the Supreme Court will
| have to review the whole question. It is
| the opinion of some attorneys that the SUI
preme Court will not sustain the Appellate
Court In its decision regarding these con-
tracts. 1t Is suggested that should the
Appellate Court be reversed in the matter
an ugly and confusing situation would arise
| in many counties where contracts have been
| let. c. w. Welman said yesterday that he
expected to collect at least $4,000 in one
county in which he has contract, and
where his contract calls for 80 1-3 per cent.
commission