Atlanta tri-weekly journal. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1920-19??, 1922-07-15
The Repeal of the Tax Equalization
Law

It is of utmost concern that the
people Of Georgia should examine
into the methods of taxation in the
state Every human being within
the limits of the state is vitality in
terested in securing their rights;
also their responsibilities and their
duties under the tax law.
Nearly ten years ago the appro-
priations were SO immense, the clam
or so great for pension money and
school-teacher money, that the tax
law Of the state constitution made
in 1877 was set aside for what was
called the tax equalization law.
Under the new law the tax re-
ceiver is to receive the tax returns
| made by property owners, and tab
ulate them, and then turn these re-
turns over to three men, appointed
and selected by the county commits
Sioners of each county as equaliZers.
These three men were to be chosen
for their fair-mindedness, their gooG
standing as citizens, and asfproperty
owners themselves. No man under
the law could hold this tax assessor
or equalizer place unless he was a
freebooter and a gentleman of good
reputation. These three men were
to examine the returns-all the re-
turnS-raise the taxes on the prop
erty when returned too low, and
! equalize to a stated basis the en-
| tire taxable property in each coun-
| ty. 1t looked good on paper. 1t
sounded we'll, but it had a cancer
| spot in it-several of them. It is
a physical impossibility for these
men to inspect the real estate and
other visible property returned by
the owners in the fifty days allowed.
When they raise the taxes on your
| property they announce to the
world that your oath before the tax
! receiver is mo good" For instance,
| in 1919, I gave in all my land, good
land, poor land, uncleared and un-
cultivated land, at SIS per acre.
Arbitrators, who were also county
/ processioners, went all over my
tract to define the lines between the
heirs to my husbands land property.
Rich Etowah river lands were taxed
at low figures, and many of the
best plantations at $3.50 per acre,
My near neighbours on the east side
were taxed at $40, at $11, on down to
SIS per acre. On the west, my near.
est neighbor, at SIS, and except the
lands owned by the FELTON, heirs, and
one neighbor, as high as $40 per
acre. On the south lands purchased
at over 500 per acre were only
taxed at $40 per acre.
On June 10, 1919, I was notified
that the assessor had raised me tc
$40 per acre. I let it go at that
made, no outcry. When the tax di
gest was laid open to the people in
the ordinary's office T was taxed al
$26 per acre. I vainly appealed to
the county commissioners, to Mr.
Fullbright, state tax commissioner
and finally went to Comptroller w
A. Wright, who said it was illegal
and I should not pay the last raise
and did not.
[ have been particularly careful to
detail this transaction, to illustrate
what the same people have done to
protect their friends, in this good
year 1922. There is a magnificent
property in my town that made a
tax return as to it's value in 1921,
The president of the company on
oath said it was worth $4,000 Gt
had been capitalized at $4,000, also
had a reserve of $4,000, to protect
it's interests and was worth more
than four times, as to value, as re-
turned by the owners. That prop