Daily Arizona silver belt., 1907-01-23

respective values are as we have sug-
 gested, let us suppose them to be re-
 turned to the territorial board as "'pat.
 ented mines, $l,l00, in other words at
 tenth of their value. If the ter
 ritorial board upon examination of the return should be satisfied that the valu- ation is only one tenth of the ratio of
 valuation placed upon other property in that and in other counties, it be- come sthe plain unquestioned duty of the board to raise the item 1.-two pat ented mines $l ,l00' to read 1.-two pat ented mines $l1,000." IL must be as sumed that the assessor aud the local board have assessed and capitalized prop. erly the relative value of these mines. and if the increase from $1,l00 to $1l,- GOO made by the territorial board is not above the aggregate value of the two mines, then no injustice is done to either But if in fact the assessor as. sessed teh two mines at the same valuo that is, assessed s mine worth Sl.. 900 at $550 and B s mine worth SlO.. 900 at S550, which is in direct violation of his duty, and yet which is constantly done-and the local board leaves the valuation stand as fixed by the assessor, gross injustice must result from the raise made by the territorial board. bnt without fault or intention of that board. Were the raise made effective A $ mine worth $l ,000 would he assessed at $5.. 500, or five and one-half times its value. and s mine worth $l0,000 would also stand at $500, which is but little over half it's proper valuation. While in fact the raise of the valuation of the "small mine" was made by the territorial board, that board assed entirely within it's province upon the returns before it, and the gross iniusiee done was done by the local assessor and local board of equalization (the superyisors) in their fragrant disregard of their duty, and be. yond the power of the territorial board to remedy.
 Local Officers Blamed
 l trust. that may be pardoned for enlarging upon this feature. but the general misapprehension that the terri l torial board was in any wise to blame for overhurdeping the non producing mines, which has prevailed throughout the territory, fostercs by interested ad. 1 voeates, seems to me to justify clabora- ! tion. That fault is palpably with the local officers and not with the territorial | board. ] have reason to believe that this will in the future be at least ma terially modified by close attention by | the local officers to their duty in this respect
 The situation presented many dificul. | ties, to be sure. Taking again Coehise | county for an illustration. it had been ! found that the assessor of that county ! had quite uniformly assessed all pat ented mines in his county at so much [ per acre, irrespective of their actual and relative valuations. To limited I extent only did he vary the rule. He would assess a remarkably productive claim at a few thousand dollars. but the claims of that group would be assessed at so many dollars on acre And with these few exceptions all mines looked alike to him It was ob- yipus then. that au unproductivc mining property of only nominal or speculative valne, which had been valued by tho local assessor on an equality with the great producing mines, would suffer an injustice by this increase--p provided the assessor had not placed it's valuation absurdly low.
 Whom Increase Affected
 But ii was determined to order the regardless of the rossible in justice that might be worked inciden. tally The existing conditions were in tolerable. If the owners ol enormously valuable mines could fix the assessments of their properties by dictating to com plaisant assessors and boards of super yisors, they at once became greater and