The St. Mary banner. (Franklin, Parish of St. Mary, La.) 1889-1931, 1917-04-21

| S!IHS
" - .,.,,
sity fer TIE prov;siun NJ ua;..
nance, because then you are nro.,;s
, cd w.h fund that YOU can a p,osio-
legally. ard be relieved of ,hp pe'ats
/ sponSio!lltv Of using a surnlns -,
; set aside for other purposes 'anG i
E.hlr,. should be sacred, ana
| we say too that it is very imnor
tant that those in control of p n"-
| drainage dl'tTlc.s. ard other bod;a.
OF Ike character. should hold moot
, III a least once d year. and that ~.
proceedings Of said meeting a;r w
an tented account of tbo;r s".nS
ceipts and Disbursements, should ho
published in a newspaper published
IN or near heir respective districts
.Asehatsiaya Bay Ship Channel
a number of tax PAYERS called nv,
attention to II" fact that the comma
ton of the Parish Of ST. Mary VIZ
the Atchafa!aya Bay Ship Cnannsi
Company had never been satisfactn.
il; explained to them As,h,t, =,
thorized and expected to- Investigate
matters OF this character, we have
done 50, and make the FOLLOWING ~
port in reference t, same.
We find that in 1907. ono t,;.d
o! the proper" tax payers of tha
Parish of s.. Mary signed no+;+;"s
addressed 20 the Police jury of SAID
Parish, requesting that an cloct;nu
De called to vote a tax of one mill
to accumulate the fixed sum ~
SG5O0.00 per annum, to con+;,wa
Tor seven years, and to agprcoats
the sum of $40, 10000. This o."
tea was called, held and the tax wa.
voted was
We find upon further invest;,,.
ton that the sum of SIS 1927. 81 was
collected during that period of sew
en- years, which total exceeded the
amount Of S45,5oo.O0 by s1O,3279
ne original amount, we assume
vas based on the assessment At ~
time of the voting of the tax w.
assume that the over plus was Great
ed on account OF the increase IN
assessments. 1t is evident that dr..
ing the payment of this stipulated !
sum to the Atchafalaya Bay shin
Channel Company, that this increase
IN assessment had been Overlooked.
by the Police Jury, and the tax Wa.
continued and the payments made.
TOR the full period of seven years:
with reference to millage and not
to the fixed amount.
We find that the Polics jury ha.
received from the Atchafalaya Raw
Snip Channel Company the sum Of
$3',778.s7; being 81 and one half
per cent of the amount paid into the
said Company, leaving a differenc. !.
OF Sl8,C49.1O to be accounted for.
After making numerous INQUIRIES.
we tlnd that there was an agreement
to this effect.
That after receiving the amount
derived from this tax to assist them
in the digging of their Channel. il
was agreed that when the Govern.
ment took over this Channel, and
paid them for it, that the said Com.
pany was to re'rurn to the Parish Of
st. Mary. the amount paid by the
PARISH Of st. Mary to said Company.
It being stipulated that the Parish
would use this money either for
school purposes, or for the building
If roads.
This agreement does not appear in
he Ordinance calling the election.
,ut it does appear in the minutes Of
ne Atchafalaya Bay Ship Channel
Company
To be more explicit as to the fin.
'nclal transaction between the Chan
'el Company and the Parish of St..
nary, it is evident to US from the
'gures given in another part of this
eport. the Channel Company re-
elved from the Parish $lO,327.97,
more than it was entitled to, and it
$ our opinion that this amount
hould be returned to the Parish.
'6,971.37 CIR 81 and one half per
ent has already been returned to
he Parish under the system of re-
und made to the stockholders. This
caves balance Of S3,356.6O still
ce and we advise that it should be
objected.