Martinsburg herald. [volume] (Martinsburg, W. Va.) 1881-1920, 1912-01-20
FEE QUESTION is
TO BE PASSED ON
6y the Supreme Court Of West vir-
sinia at an Early Dste--Now IN
Supreme Court Of Appeals.

1 A3sdAi%EtOtls JfAAis Adtt NN fSAJ
Important questions now causing coz
iderable interest relative TO what
county officials are entitled TO in the
way OF fees Is now IN the hands Of
| the Supreme Court Of Appeals, Of
| this state Tie case in which these
questions ere involved is that Of
Ncase VS.. Smith, sheriff OF Kanawba
county The three points are:
| Is smith entitled to the sum Of
s1,6004S aggregate interest or pen
fatty collected by him on all taxes paid
after the first day Of January, 1910?
Is Smith entitled to seven and one
half per cent for collecting district
road taxes. or is he entitled to FIVE
per cent?
Is Smith required to account for
and Pay into the county treasury flf-
teen per cent of the fees and emolu-
ments of his Office, where the anne
exceed SO 10000, under the provisions
% Chapter 10, Acts 1903?
These are the three points raised
| by Mr.. Nease, taxpayer of Kanawha
county. The sheriffs have been con
tending they are entitled to all in
terest added TO taxes as a penalty
| for failure to pay before the first of
each year. They have also contended
that they are not required to pay into
the county treasury fifteen per cent
of the emoluments OF the Office.
In the case of the third point raised
| Q greater question IL Involved from
the standpoint OF the sheriff than that
OF the first point. The last question
has twofold .oint Now the sher-
| Ifs, or rather the most of them, have
been receiving the interest, which In
the aggregate amounts to anywhere
from 800 900 to $4,000 a year. 1t
has also been custom that where
taxes are not paid early or before the
interest is added, county orders have
been endorsed by the sheriff and they
bear interest until paid. These orders
may carry interest for several months.
That interest Is paid by the county,
while the sheriffs have been collect
ing the taxes after the first OF the
year, with the added penalty. and re-
tanning the penalty. If the sheriffs
are denied the right to this interest
or penalty. 1t is conteaded, that grea-
ter effort in many instances will be
made to collect the taxes before the
first of the year and thereby the coun-
ties saved large sums of money. The
interest that has been taken by the
sheriffs in the greater majority of the
counties would also go into the coun-
~ treasury.
In the case of the second point
the difference between five and seven
and one-half per cent for the collec-
ton of road states is not very large
item. This confusion was brought
about by the legislature passing the
general road law four days after it
had passed O law fixing a commission
OF five per cent for the collecting of
all taxes, including road taxes. The
sections of the road law that was
copied in the last act were taken from
the alternate road act Of 1881, which
gave seven, and one-half per cent for
the collecting of road taxes. 1t is
contended by the tax commissioner
department that the sheriffs are only
entitled to five per cent because the
act fixing the commission the sheriffs
shall receive names specifically FIVE,
l.er cent-the act being one fixing the
compensation Of county officials
The first point raised by Mr.. Nease
in his case is that of the compensa-
ton sheriff is entitled to. In fact
he same point would enter into every
ether county Office where fees are
col ected. The tax commissioner has
commended that the sheriff was en-
titled to eighty-five per cent of the
emoluments OF his Office, with a mini
iaum compensation, as provided by
statute. Of 100000. This would leave
fifteen per cent to go into the county
treasury.
Chapter fifteen when enacted had
two-fold purpose. First, to require
al accounting by the officers named,
so that future legislatures might know
the income OF the respective Offices
and, second, for the purpose of rev.
enue to the counties. In this it was
/ provided that certain percentages OF
the emoluments, under certain condi-
tons, were payable into the county
treasures.
The tax commissioner as well as
the attorneys for the sheriffs associa-
tloa which Is fighting the case, have
asked the supreme court to pass up
or the question at an early date as
possible. Contrary to expectation
these points. it ID now believed that
all points at issue between the tax
commissioner and county officials are
now within the breast OF the supreme
court.