Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1917-05-15
STEWART TO ASK PROBE
|. OF INHERITANCE TAX FEES
Governor and Comptroller
General Deny Approving
Attorney Generals Plan

There have been a number of develop
ments in the Inheritance tax fee agita-
ton since the question was raised as to
the authority of the attorney general to
I appoint local attorneys in each county to
| look after the collection of these taxes,
and also the attorney generals authority
to contract with these lawyers on 4
basis of 10 per cent in fees on all taxes
! paid.
Representative c. f. Stewart. of Cof-
/ fee county. has been quoted as declaring
/ his intention to introduce resolution
at the meeting of the legislature i'm June
calling for the appointment of a joint
committee from house and senate to
| thoroughly investigate the entire matter
the appointment of the local attorneys
and the fees collected by them, as we'll
as the kind OF contracts made with each
| by the attorney general
Judge Henry McAlpin the ordinary OF
! Chatham county, is quoted in Fridays
! Savannah Press as having stated that
he had received a letter from Attorney
| General Clifford Walker, advi sing him
that he had appointed the law firm of
Osborne Lawrence K Abrahams to look
after the collection of inheritance taxes
in Chatham and had contracted on be-
half of the state, to pay this firm 10 per
| cent of all such taxes paid in.
Judge McAlpin said that acting upon
the authority of this letter. a copy of
which had been turned over to Tax Col
Hector Fred Cler. Osborne, Lawrence q
Abrahams had been paid 10 per cent on
all taxes collected.
These fees it appears. are being paid
i'm Chatham and other counties even in
cases wnere there has been no litigation
or service on the part of the local at
torneys.
ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT.
The article in the Savannah Press
concludes with the following para
graphs which have brougNt another
development in the controversy:
when the tax has been paid into the
county the tax collector has been send
Ing on to Atlanta official returns with
the receipt from the law firm for their
commission for collection. These re-.
ceipts have been countersigned in ev-
erv case by Comptroller William A
Wright and returned to Mr.. Cler tax
collector.
Local authorities have been conduct
ing the matter along the lines given
in the letter from the attorney gen
eral. which stated that it had the APP
proval Of the governor, the attorney
general and the comptroller"
Comptroller General William A.
Wright stated that he had nothing
whatever 10 90 Wltn the enforcement
of the inheritance tax law, and that all
tax collectors are required by law 10
make returns to him of all taxes col
lected. These returns are required to
be made in duplicate and must show
all deductions.
General Wright said it is his duty
to countersign these returns. br that
such certifcation had nothing what
ever to do with authorizing the col
lection of the inheritance tax fees. The
returns made to him show receipts and
deductions of all kinds.
General Wright said on all returns
which showed deductions for inheri-
lance tax fees he entered the follow
ing before counterSigning them:
deductions made upon instructions
of attorney general
Both Governor Harris and General
Wright emphatically denied that they
had ever approved the attorney generals
plan of paying fees to the local attor-
neys. They both stated that the mat
ter had not been discussed with them,
II never authorized the statement to
be made that l had given my approval
to such plan" said the governor. II
have never been a party to any agree
ment of any kind on this matter, nor
did | have anything to do with the APP
pointments of the local attorneys"
General Wright said: 81 have never
passed on or approved any such plan.
In fact | have never been consulted
about it. and it was never submitted to
me for my APPROVAL I have not had
anything to do with it one way or the
other"
In state house circles Saturday it,
was the almost unanimous opinion that
the law did not empower the attorney
general to employ these lawyers in
each county or to pay them out Of
taxes due the state. A considerable OF
a rumpus has been created by the pub
fication of the facts in the case and
there appears no doubt that the legis-
lature will put an end to what has
been described as political gratuities