Idaho County free press. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho Territory) 1886-current, 1905-09-28
WILL ENTER
STATE LEVY
Idaho County Decides Not to Oppose
the State.
ATTORNEY BARrLErT's OPINION
Makes q Difference OF About
$1,000 to this County.

After careful investigation the
county officials have decided to
enter the tax levy for state pur-
poses made by the state board.
Throughout the northern part of
the state this tax has caused much
discussion and in some counties
the matter will have to be settled
in the courts. The state constitu-
tion provides that where the total
assessed valuation of the state ex-
ceeds $50, 900, 900 not more than
five mills shall be levied for cur
rent expenses. The total amount
demanded Of this county is $l3,-
490.23, which, making allowances
for delinquent taxes, cannot be
raised by . Eve mill levy. The
question has arisen whether all Of
this state money is used for cur
rent expenses or whether that part
used to pay public debts and sub
sides should be considered addi-
tional taxes. According to the
present levy Idaho county will pay
about $1,000 above the constitu-
tional five mills. On Tuesday
Attorney Bartlett gave written
opinion on the subject and upon
his advice the levy will be made.
It is as follows:
September 25, 1905.
"Mr. J. /. Oyerman. County Audi
tor, City.
"Dear Sir: Respecting the mat
ter Of the state levy and the pro-
portion to be borne by this county
as noted in the Notice Of Annual
Determination and Apportionment
of State Taxes Of the state audi
tor, dated August 3lst, and psrtic.
ularly relating to the constitution.
ality of said state levy, I have to
advise you as follows;
~ cannot take the view which
lappears to have been taken in the
counties of Nez Perce and Shoshone
that because the total valuation o
the property in the state now ex
ceeds fifty millions Of dollars tha'
the total tax for all purposes Of th'
state may not under the provisions
OF the state constitution, as found
in article 7, exceed five mills. I
! seems to me that such is not tn
! construction put upon this article
!. and article 8 Of the constitution b,
= our supreme court, in Stein va
Morrison, reported in IS Pac. Re
porter at page 246 ct seq.
1.-THE court there says: The com
, plete plan outlined in this articl
: (7) provides for the raising OF rev
enue to meet the current expendi
;. lures On the other hand, arti
: Gle 8 contemplates the contractin
I, of Indebtedness, the issuance {
y state bonds, etc. 1t authorizes th
. legislature to create debts not
= exceed II per centum upon th
y assessed valuation OF the taxabl
!, property therein.
" "Viewed from this point Of view
the total valuation Of the count
being t2,9l8, 8,243.O4, and the 81
portionment to the county for stal
r current expenses, il you pleas
r being $13, ,490.23, it will be see
" that this sum is we'll within Il
,e constitutional limit.
b 1.-THE other items in said Motto
n Included under the head OF 'oth'
ID taxes, and amounting to %, 899. B
Or come in my mind within the fo
10 lowing article Of the constitutio
viz, Article s, Public Indebte
ness and 6ubsidies,' where the lin
is placed at one and one-half p
centum, which limit it will be o
served far exceeds the tax impose
"In view Ut the above I shs
o. advise you to enter the levy
to made by the board at its last NEE
or ing.
is "Very respectfully yours,
ed ct. II. BARTLETT,