The Bamberg herald. [volume] (Bamberg, S.C.) 1891-1972, 1922-05-25
Mr.. J. T. Durham,

CQlumDld, SOutu NdlOAAA
Dear Mr.. Durham:
Our auditor, Mr.. w. D. Rowell,
has Just called my attention to the
fact that your commission has in
structed him to raise the valuation
of the farm lands in this county from
an average of $3.50 per acre last
year to an average of s6.4O per acre
for 1922, making an increase of 36
per cent.
Twas very much surprised to learn
of this order, and I am at a loss to
understand how the commission
hopes to Justify such an increase in
the valuation of the farm lands in
this county at this time. 1 feel that
this order must have been issued
without full knowledge Of the con-
ditions that exist in the agricultural
sections of this county, and it is for
the purpose of explaining these con-
ditions that this letter is written.
I feel that, when you have carefully
considered the matter, you will
promptly revoke the order just IS
sued, and that you will issue a new
order, directing the auditor to de-
crease the valuation in this county.
IF there ever was time when valua-
tions of the farm lands in this county
should be decreased, instead of In
creased, it is now.
Last year our cotton crop was cut
down by the ravages OF the boil wee
vii to about 4,164 bales, as compared
with an average yield of about 2s,-
600 bales for the county; in other
words, the yield was reduced about
IS per cent, the farmers making
about Is per cent. Of crop. 1t is
known fact that the boil weevlls are
more abundant this year than ever
before, so how can we expect a great
er yield this year?
Unfortunately, the people of this
county have not yet learned to raise
other money producing crops success
fully. Last year, the farmers tried
tobacco, but the crop was practically
a failure, and the price was so low
that everyone lost money on what
they planted. This year, the farmers
are planting a little truck, but the
industry is still in its infancy, and 1t
is impossible to tell what will be the
result.
I was informed by our treasurer
this morning that about 20 per cent
of the taxes for last year have not
vet been paid, and I am sure that
great part of those who have paid
used money that was made in pre-
yious years. I doubt whether a half
dozen farmers in the county made
enough on their farms last year,
above operating expenses, to pay tax
es. Now, I ask, in the face of these
facts. is it fair to increase the valu-
alton of the farm lands Of the county,
and thereby increase the farmers
taxes?
The leading economists agree that
one of the basic rules for taxation is
liability to pay" 1t can hardly be
said that the farmers ability to pay
has been increased during the past
year, and, on the other hand, it can
readily be seen that it has been de-
creased.
I realize that the present valua-
ton of s4.69 per acre appears rather
low, but when it is considered thai
less than one-fourth of the acreage in
this county is under cultivation
that a great part Of the acreage is
in swamps and low lands and is
practically worthless-it is then real
lied that the present valuation,
which Represents an acreage valua-
tion of all lands, is not too low as
compared with other counties.
You will remember that the whole
trend of legislation last year was to
reduce the amount of taxes on visible
property, and particularly on farm
lands. This was done because the
legislators, who are the representa-
tives of the people, realized the strain
that the farmers were under, and
sought to tighten their burdens. A
material reduction was made, the
levy being reduced from II to Z mills.
This will give the farmers and owners
of visible property considerable re-
valuation ~ farm