The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1910-12-21
Taxes.

To the Honorable the Common Councll:
Gentlemen-Your = o III m tee on
Taxes TO whom was icierred the peti-
tons of Chas L. Hamilton MIS- MISS
Universal supply Co. solomon Berman
NJ. II. Chamberlain Jr.. Zenner Dish
fectant Co, w. A. Drolet. Elizabeth w.
Ianley, Politician sisters 6sS u Jno; n
Fremont Woodruff. Thomas Reaney.
Paul c. Renaud and Chas. Sieber, all
asking for cancellation rtductioh ana
adjustment Of certain general city
taxes IN whole or In part. respectfully
report that we have had same unde'
con sideration. have listened to the
statements Of the varied petitioners.
and after consultation with the Board
OF Assessors, beg leave 10 submit th'
following detailed report:
Repetition of Chas. |. Hamiton. We
find that personal asses sinent or SZVo
wns levied against Mrs. Hamilton for
1903 and also an assessment OF $1,000
AGAINST G. L. Hamilton for same year.
which petitioner claims Is excessive
and enorbItant; that We submitted the
matter to the Assessors and said Board
recommends that tho assessment ievtci
against Mrs Hamilton be cancelled aui
that the assessment OF $1,000 levied
against c. l.. Hamilton he reduced 10
5000 which IA The recommendation of
Re. petition IF Miss a. Colford. we
End that "A personal assessment OF
$500 was levied against her for 1910
uron IL IL Goods, located at Monroe
United the matter to the ASSESSORS for
investigation and said Board recon-
u,cnds that said assessment be reduced
To $1,000. which recomm cndation II
coucurred In by your committee.
Repetition OF Detroit School Of Let
tering, we find that personal assess
ment of $500 was levied against II
for 1910 through failure 10 file a
Mt ~ no IA "a
timo prescribed oy law. that good and
sufficient reasons were presented
therefor, and upon submitting the mat
ter t. the Assessors, said BOARD rec
omfnenjs that said assessment be re-
duced to $500, which recommendation
l., concurred In By your committee.
Repetition Of Universal supply Co,
We find that a personal assessment of
81. 900 was levied against II for 1910.
which Assessment petitioners aver Is
grossly eNorbitant. an 1 after listening
TO the testimony offered we recon-
mend that same be reduced TO 5000 90
that personal assessment of $1,000
was levied against him, for 1910, tina;
petitioner AYERS that Same ~ grossly
IN excess OF personal property, and
asks for rcadjustmcnt. that he was
allowed To rile "a new statement and
taking all matters into consideration.
ne recommend that SAID assessment Je
reduced 10 5000
Re.TetItion OF NJ " chamberlain Jr
we find that personal assessment OF
81 500 was levied against him for 1910.
which Il grossly excessive and upon
further iuvestigation we recommend
that same be reduced to $500
Re. petition or Zenner Disinfectant
Co. we hrd that a personal assessment
og $1,000 WIS levied against said com
p,lny I'm t3Og. which said assessment
was raised To $4,000 In 1916 that pc
tittonct claims the last mentioned as
sessment To be erroneous, hut the As
seSsors informed your committee that
tho assessment was placed at said sum
IN order 10 compel petitioner 10 Me a
settlement a. provided by law. which
they failed 40 do. and they now ask
that said assessment be reduced to q