Arizona republican., 1912-09-26
Action of Yavapai County Board of Equalization in Reducing Duplicate Tax Rolls Following An nolmcement of Tax Rate.
IS DISCUSSED
 PRO AND CON
In All Day Session Before Supreme Tribunal State Contends for Superior Power of State Board Over County Board.

over county Board.
 The Yavapai tax case is now in the hands of the supreme court of the state of Arizona for decision as to whether the county boards of equali- zation have a right to revise any ac- tion they may have taken with regard to the county assessment rolls after out, a copy of the same sent to the state board of equalization and the tax levy for any one year announced. In other words the relative body and the county tax levHing and equalizing body is now about to be fixed by decision by the highest court of the state, after a contentious argument which has ragged between the state board and the Yavapai county board for the matter of a month or more. The argument and the case took up whole days ses- sion of the supreme court Chief Jus
 tice Alfred Franklin presiding. The state case was argued by George Purdy Bullard attorney general of Arizona. while the side of the Yavapai county board of equalization was presented bv District Attorney P. W. O'Sullivan Of Prescott After the attorneys had
 made their oral argument and submit ted volumnous briefs. the court took the case under advisement and re- cessed. The judgment will be handed down later
 This case is one wherein the county board of equalization of Yavapai coun- ty reduced the assessable valuation of
 the county by subtracting from the as Sessed valuation of the United Verde Mining company some million and a half dollars Following the announce ment by the state of the state tax rate. and after the Yavapai county board had sent a copy of the duplicate tax rolls to the state board of equalization
 The result of this action was, if it had been allowed to go unchallenged. and it's result will be if the action of the county board is upheld. to deprive the state of a large sum of it's revenue. and it will have the effect of reducing the states income for these state in stitutions materially for the present fiscal year Further than this it is con IenUeu that ldu lue IIldlItT DttH dt- lowed to go unchalIenged it would have set a precedent that would have been ruinous to the fiscal policy as at pres ent carried out under the constitution and the laws of the first and special sessions Of the legislature Of the state. The matter was not however allowed to go unchallenged. Immediately upon receipt of the information as to the action of the Yavapai county board of equalization. the state board held meeting and discussed the question in all it's details, called in the governor and the attorney general and then
 'sicced' the attorney general on the Yavapai supervisors. the same being also the equalizers General Bullard
 possessed himself of a formidable doc ument in the nature of a demand upon
 the county equalizers, which was signed by the state board by the gov
 ernor and by the attorney general and
 made a journey to Prescott with fur
 ther threat in the form of an appiica
 tion for a temporary alternate writ of
 mandamus in the superior court of Va
 vapai county.
 In spite of the threat the county
 
 ter bit. but stood to their ground
 contending they had done nothing that
 was not within their power as board
 of county equalization in reducing the
 assessable valuation of the United
 Verde mines. The application for the
 writ of mandamus was then made and
 the temporary writ sued cut. Upon
 d hearing of the case before Judge Frank Smith of the superior court of
 Yavapai county. the states contention
 was overruled and the writ vacated
 whereupon the attorney general in be-
 half of the state did then and there
 axcept which was in it's turn over ruled and an appeal from the decision of the court taken.
 Thus stood the case, with the eXcep
 tion of the fact that both sides were
 girding themselves for the battle roy
 al they knew would take place before
 the supreme tribunal. up until yester-
 day when the case was called. At the calling of the case Attorney General
 Bullard led off with an argument that
 consumed several hours of the courts
 time A noon recess was taken and
 with the reassembling of the case
 District Attorney P w. O'Suilivan pre-
 scented the argument for his side. Both
 the attorneys went into the details of
 the organization of the boards for
 which they were the respective cham
 pions, showing their genesis, the scope
 of their powers, and their functions in
 exercising them Both the attorneys received congratulations from friend