The Cook County herald. [volume] (Grand Marais, Minn.) 1893-1909, 1904-03-12
IN J | /
D E I o
State Auditor Decides Against
Cook County ID Bates & Nc
Donald Tax Case. !: @.tS .=.. .2.#.


Auditor Murphy has received notice
of decision rendered by the state audi.
tor on February 9th cancelIing the
assessment and taxes levied in Cook
county against certain property of the
firm Ut Bates & Mcdonald. The prop.
erty 10 question was lot of square tim.
bers manufactured for shipment direct
through Canada to England. It was
assessed at S2,2S3, and the taxes OF
which this county IS thus deprived were
$119'21.. Although no notice was given
to this county, it now appears that Bates
l. Mcdonald appealed to the state aud
itor to have tins tax levy cancelled on
the grounds that the same property
was assessed in st. Louis county. On
the evening of February Goth the county
auditor received letter from tho state
auditor informing him that such appeal
had been taken and that the same would
be heard at his Office in st. Paul the FOL-
lowing day. Under these circumstances
IL was impossible, of course, for this
county to be represented at the hearing,
and Its side Of the case went by default.
BY the following mail notice was receiv-
cd that the appeal was decided az stated
in the beginning of this article.
The point upon which the decision in
this case hinges has been IN controversy
for several years, and has been decided
by the presnt state auditor and by his
predecessor, Bob Dunn, in favor Of Cook
county. The local officials are in a
quandary as to the kind of reasoning
upon which these former decisions are
now reversed.
In 1902, while r. G. Dunn was state
auditor, certain ties, posts and poles be-
longing to the Duluth Log Co., were
listed by the assessor of Tote township
and placed on the tax rolls Of this
county. The assessor requested the
company to list the property, and upon
their refusing 80 to do ne proceeded to
place fair valuation upon the same, as
he was required by law to do under
such circumstances. The company ap-
pealed to the state auditor, on the
grounds that the property was assessed
and taxable in St. Louis county. In
that case the county was given due no.
tice of the appeal and date of hearing.
Being unable to be present at the hear
ing Auditor Murphy presented Cook
unty's side of the controversy in writ
ing.
The law provides that "the personal
property pertaining to the business of a
merchant or Of manufacturer shall be
listed in the town or district where his
business is carried on" In that case it
was commended that lnasmuch as the
business of manufacturing the property
in question was carried on exclusively IN
Cook county it should be assessed in
this county. State Auditor Dunn up
held this contention, aud decided that
the taxes should be- paid in Cook county
It must be borne in mind that IN the
case Of ties, posts and poles (Which are
manufactured in the woods it is Diff
ferent proposition than that of pine logs
prepared for Shipment to a sawmill to be
manufactured into lumber.
Again, in 1908, L. R. Martin ap.
pealed to the state auditor from az
assessment OF ties, posts and poles in
upon the same grounds-that the prop,
erty was taxed in st. Louis county, and
State Auditor Iverson decided in favor
Of this county. but reduced the assess.
ment from $4,000 to $4,000.
Now, il those decisions were right
then & wrong is done Cook county by
this decision in the Bates & Mcdonald
case. There can be no other explana.
nation than that he was wrong in decid.
ing the Martin case and that State Aud
itor Dunn was wrong in his decision OF