Free trader-journal. (Ottawa, Ill.) 1916-1920, 1919-02-22
or taxed thereon. Consequently this
item had TO be eliminated

At the time Of his decease T. W
Matthicssen Was tire owner Of bonds
of the par value Of about S2.7C0,o00.
II appears hat for the last ten years
said deceased had been paying taxes
on. from S25,0GG to about $4,000 worth
of bonds. What bonds he owned ten
years ago we were unable to ascer
tain, but we did have the fact that
he owned about S2,7e00 900 worth at
the time of his death. The amount
Of bonds that he was paying taxes on
at the time of his death was insig-
nificant compared with the amount
that he actually owned. However the
right OF the board Of review to assess
the estate for bonds oRitted from as
sessment and taxation under these
circumstances is questionable, be-
cause our court has held numerous
times, and especially in Barley VS..
Dale, 2l3 Ill, GA, that where credits
had been assessed and the taxes eX-
tended and paid, board Of review IN
subsequent year cannot review and
increase such assessment under the
guise Of assessing credits omitted in
/ the previous years and that such as
sessment cannot be made unless
/ fraud is established, and the mere
| fact thai such property was under
valued does not of itself establish
/ fraud. Your County Attorney does not
mean to say that this and other au-
! thorities are conclusive against the
power to assess these bonds, bat de-
/ sires to state that the right of the
/ board of review to assess in such
cases is questionable. The only evil
dence of fraud here was the fact that
the schedules fled valued such bonds
at sum far less than the par value.
| The court has said that underyalu2-
ton does not of itself establish fraud.
/ The answer OF your County Attorney
to chat proposition was that the value
of bonds scheduled was 50 little in
comparison to their actual value that
the situation itself imports fraud. It
can readily be seen that the right OF
the board TO mack such assessment
was not entirely clear.
Said Matthiessen at the time OF his
decease was the owner Of about ST.
100000 par value Of the capital stock
of foreign corporations. Such stock
is assessabie in this state. During
the last ten years said Matthiessen
had not scheduled and he had not
been assessed on any shares OF stock
OF foreign corporations. How long LC
held this stock we have no informa
tion. This property the County Att0r
n3y thinks could be assessed as anG
fer omitted property for such years as
the said f. w. Matthiessen, Sr., de
ceased was the owner thereof. proVld
ing there was no other legal obstacle
in the way.
Said Matthiessen was also on ApTi
/, 1917, the owner Of about S60Q,00'
par value OF German war bonds, pur
, chased by him during the latter par
of 1916 and the first part Of 1917
Property is to be assessed accord
: ing to dts value on April LIST of eac
Y year, and, it is very doubtful whethe
/. such German war bonds on April
!. 1917. at or about the time the Unite
9 States government entered the wal
. and also on April l, 1918, had an
! value.
A,, TO ntb of
by Matthiessen at the time of hi
death he had for years prior thereto
been scheduling certain amounts 0
the same, and under the decision il
Barkely VS.. Dale above referred to, i
is quite clear that the board Of re
view could not reach such property.
The question also arose during Thu
= hearings whether or not the board o
review had the authority to make al
assessment against the estate TO
omitted property after September 9TH
for the reason that it was neCessar,
d after such date to bring into the Pre-
ceeding certain other taxing bodies
such as the State OF Illinois, Town o
La Sale, County Of La Sale, hisI
school district No. 100, school dis
, trict No. 122 and the highway com
missioner
There was another question tina
| also arose with more particular refer
D ence to the bonds owned by MI
{ Matthiessel. He had during his life
time, through his agent, been schedu
! ing a small amount Of bonds and q
4 several occasions during the last te'
years the board of review had calle
p in Mr.. Matthiessen, who appeared b.
p his representative, and thcreupon
8 hearing was had as to how much h
, should be assessed for bonds and ceI
= tain other items Of property, On tW
- of these occasions the board of reyieI
p raised and increased on their own me
ton ihe assessment Gu such bond
] and other items of property, This
however. did not involve the share
j of the capital stock of foreign col
. porations. The contention was mad
D.. that inasmuch as the board OF revie1
t had on is own motion after an il
| yestigation, increased the amour. @
| Matthi2ssen's assessment for .-- .
y that s1rh action Drpriudpd n euhS