Albuquerque weekly citizen. (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1891-19??, 1903-10-17
new MEXICO ASSESSMENTS.
Gain Of Almost a Million Over Re-
port Of Last Year.
INEQUALITIES NEED RtMtDYlNG.

Territorial Auditor w. G. Sargent
has compiled the assessed valuation
for each county OF the territory, al
though some OF the assessment re.
turns are not complete or the classi.
fed totals conflict with the grand to-
tails. There may be some changes
therefore before the figures can be &C.
cepted as final. They. however. are
very near the correct amounts. San
Miguel county leads in taxable valua-
tion, the total assessment being So
1872 ,436. Bernallllo county is second
with value ,on of SO. 1903. 120. Colfax,
Chaves and Grant come next In the
order named, their assessed valua-
ton being respectively s2,9S1,41l; 81
939,012 and s2.912.S7L other counties
whose assessed valuation is above
$4,000 600 are the following: Santa Fe,
S2,207 .Si2; Dona Ana s2,1S9, S99D; So
zorro S2,0s6,610; Union s2,021.640.
The counties whose assessed valua.
tion exceeds $1,000 900 are Eddy ST.
1854; Otero si,5,0,SGi. Luna ST..
SOP .G92; Valencia 1889, 1856: Lincoln
s1,34S,S 500; Sierra si,326920 Mora
sl.1i5.s23. Then come Rio Arriba
1881 ,655; Mckinley s96S177; Leonard
Wood S923.017; Sandoval s972.565;
Quay s76299S San Juan s679,941;
laos S677 $50; Roosevelt sG49,16i.
The total assessed valuation OF the
territory according to the above tg-
ures is sii,S51 SIC a gain over last
year OF s7i2.sS However, the act
ual gain In assessment subject to tax
alton is almost 100000, owing to the
elimination of double assessments in
several counties. Ten counties show
a loss in assessment partly accounted
for by the loss OF territory toward the
creation of new counties, while eleven
counties show gains in assessed val
uatlon. The greatest .oss in assessed
valuation is in assessment of Berna-
lilo county which amounts to S1,045,
Sos and is only partly explained by
the assessed valuation of $792, 565 Of
Sandoval county Then follows Va
lencia county with a oss of s641 1872;
Leonard Wood s327,07U, accounted for
by the creation of Quay county; Sier-
ra S22o, 4S2; Mora s69,39S; Santa Fe
6o.sis San Miguel s25.577: Mc.
Kinley s20.O54. Socorro slS.330; Taos
s1S.126. The largest gain was made
by Otero county 1888, 232; then comes
Lincoln county with a gain of $12l.-
062; Rio Arriba sS2,172 Luna &c.,
lis; San Juan sbo,01; Colfax s4y,.
93i; bona Ana s24.5i3; Chaves $685.
507; Grant s9.243; Eddy s5,i65; and
Union $3.50.
The poorest people are those of
Taos county for their per capita as.
sessment is only s65: Rio Arriba has
per capita assessment of $40; San
doval $40, Mora SLY; Leonard Wood
| Sl21; Bernalillo S124; Valencia $40;
Santa Fe $3.50; San Juan sl52; Me
kinney $3.50; Roosevelt s162; Socorro
| sl72; San Miguel $3.50; Lincoln 5000;
bona Ana 500; Otero $224: Quay
! $3.50; Colfax $251; Grant $3.50; Union
| s340; Chaves 1850; Luna 1916; Eddy
$500; Sierra s432, 1t is rather strange
that San Juan county without a mile
of railroad to assess presents a pei
capita assessment that exceeds thai
of Bernallllo county with the rich city
OF Albuquerque by S2S and that OF
Santa Fe county by 81, and that the
county of Sierra should lead in the
per capita assessment with the com
paratively new counties of Eddy anC
Chaves as close seconds, and Inc old
est counties with the poorest pei
capita showing These figures demon
strate that the work of equalling tax
alton in New Mexico has not progress
sed sufficiently as yet to offer an,
reasons for self congratulation