The herald-advance. (Milbank, S.D.) 1890-1922, 1906-04-13
Assessments

Assessments
Under t h above heading
brother Burt of the South Shore
Republican attempts to enlight-
en- the people of Codington coun-
| ty in the issue OF March 3Oth.
He says "these figures will
not look well in print for the fell
lows who are trying to prove
otherwise, they are nevertheless
correct" We agree with broth.
er Burt that they do not look
well in print because the figures
are incorrect and the ar
ticle 5 h ows gross ignor-
nee. Now regarding the
assessment of lands he has
gwen you the figures of the re-
turn of the county board correct
ly, viz 50, 500, AS or IS. 18 per
acre, and the state board raised
the assessment to 50, ,875,5 ,512 or
81. IL per acre, as shown by page
233, auditors report for 1905.
Bro. Burt does not seem to know
that the state board is board of
equalization whose duty it is to
equalize the property assess
ment Of the So counties of the
state, and in SO doing some prop
erty is raised, some lowered,
aud some left as returned by the
county boards, to m lake the prop
erty assessment as nearly equal
in the several counties as posi-
BILE according to value, for state
taxes, and in Codington county
as we'll as ten other counties the
assessment was raised. While
seven counties were lowered and
the balance of the So counties the
assessment was left the same as
returned by the county boards.
We find by referring to page 2O5
state auditors report for 1904,
that the assess ment for Coding-
ton county placed lands at $7.13,
while in 1905 it was $7.12 per
acre, a decrease Of one cent per
acre. Not so awfully bad as you
thought, is it Bro. Burt? Now
Bro. Burt takes up the personal
property assessment and says
the county board returned it at
81, ,429, ,817 and the state board
raised it to 81, ,842, 151 or $50 per
cent. This shows Bro. Burt S
| ignorance again. The above fig
ures are the totals of the real
and personal property assess
ments com bined, the return OF
personal property being 81, 929,
372 which was raised to 81, 966,
$50. In the personal property
list the following items were
raised, viz: bank stock 25 per
cent; elevators with grain there
in % per cent; stocks and furni-
ture of saloons, billiard halls,
ETC., 20 per cent; Office furniture,
libraries, etc. 10 per cent, and all
other personal property return
ed was unchanged by the state
board, and the raise of personal
property when complete was
less than 2 per cent ms stead of
$50 per cent. They raised the
assessment Of other property in
Codington MY, including
railroads, telegraphs, telephones,
express companies, ETC., from
$456, ,832 in 1904 to $483,O77 in
1905, or about 6 per cent, and the
total assessment was increased
from s., 155, 631 in 1904 to IS, 1876,
228 IN 1905, or an increase of a
little over 3 per cent.
70 sum up this great crime Of
the state board toward Coding-
ton county, rs pictured by Bro.
Burt, they put che assessment
of lands at per cent an acre
lower than in 1904. They raised
personal property from the fig
ures Of the county board two per
cent. They raised railroads and
other property about 6 per cent.
While the increase of all proper
ty in the county was a little over
8 per cent in the year from 1904
to 1905. Awful! Bro. Burt had
better on his glasses when
he goes oyer to Watertown
again cunning for infor nation,
and when be examines the re-
port Of the state auditor, take
time to get at the facts. and not
throw out q scare like the one re-
ferred to without knowing what
he is talking about. He might
have said that the members of
the state beard were a mean lot
- n 4 q 4