Report of Select Committee upon Chapter 20, Title 5 of the Proposed Revision.

The committee, to whom was referred chapter 20, title 5, of the proposed revision, with instructions, have had the same under consideration, and have directed me as their chairman to report:

That from the examination your committee have been able to give to the subject referred to them, they are induced to believe, that the several duties now performed by the Auditor General in relation to the redemption and sales of all lands delinquent for taxes, can be more economically, and with equal correctness, performed by the several county treasurers. Under the existing system, after each township treasurer has made his return to the county treasurer, the county treasurer is called upon to make out a complete list of all the lands in his county upon which the taxes remain unpaid, and forward the same to the Auditor General. This is an extra duty performed by each county treasurer in the state, which, together with other corrected lists and statements from time to time transmitted to the Auditor General, swelling the number of copies in some instances, to ten, twelve, or a higher number before the final disposition of the taxes, renders it necessary in many, if not all the counties in the state, to increase the annual salary of the county treasurer, one hundred dollars or over. These several statements are entered in full upon the books of the Auditor General, and if errors in descriptions or any other informalities are discovered, which, in the opinion of the Auditor General, would impair the tax, a correspondence is entered into by him with the county treasurer upon the subject of this error detected in a copy of the original returns from the township treasurers taken from the copy made by the county treasurer in his books provi ded for that purpose. These errors are in due course of time corrected, so as to satisfy the mind of the Auditor General of the correctness of all proceedings up to that time. We are told that it is necessary, in order to ensure uniformity, and rigid exactness in all proceedings upon delinquent taxes, that they should undergo the supervision of

some one man well qualified to judge upon such subjects. But your committee submit, that a well qualified person in each county may be found, whose judgment upon the original returns from each township, and whose examination of a record thereof made by the county treasurer, would tend much more to the correction of errors, than the judgment of any one man, founded solely upon a copy of a copy; and that this continued multiplication of copies, consequent upon the present system, has a tendency to lead to innumerable errors.

When the returns of the several counties in the state are sent to the Auidor General, the work of his office is increased to an amount that requires the assistance of numerous extra clerks. And amid the complicated machinery of the present tax system, your committee believe that errors are more likely to be increased than to be corrected. The expenses attendant upon the office of Auditor General, are in a great degree caused by the immense amount of labor consequent upon the tax system. And it may be asked for what is this system kept in operation? Aside from the claim that errors are thereby corrected, it is said to a be convenience to pay taxes in one place; and that the state, by having the non-resident taxes returned to the Auditor General, has the control of sufficient funds to ensure the collection of the state tax. Your committee believe, that to promote convenience in tax paying, forms no part of the necessary legislation of a govern ment, except so far as to ensure the most safe, speedy and economical collection of the taxes due from every species of property in the state to defray its expenses. If by convenience is meant an accommodation to non-resident land holders, the same argument, and with equal propriety, might be used for establishing an office for the payment of Michigan taxes in the city of New York, as that city is probably more accessible to all such non-residents than the city of Detroit. But is there not something fallacious in the argument? Surely, it can not be that to increase the amount of tax would be a matter of convenience to the land holders.

Were the taxes left in the counties, they could be paid by corresponding with the county treasurers, as they now are by correspondence with the Auditor General. But they are returned to the seat of government, and the amount is consequently increased until it swells

in many instances to twice or three times the amount of the original

tax.

We are told that most of the charges in the Auditor General's office are added to the taxes, and consequently the state loses nothing. In dollars and cents, upon delinquent taxes, it may lose nothing;but when we consider the odious name which Michigan has obtained, of high taxation, we are called upon to find-and finding, to remedy the evil. It is not that the original amount of taxation is excessive, but it is the addition of office and other charges by the Auditor General, the cost of postages, transmission of lists, advertising, and expenses of sale under his direction, &c., which increase to such a degree the nominal amount of tax upon each parcel of land. This is one cause which checks the increase of population within our borders-which turns the immigrant from our shores so seek a home in other regions of the growing west.

Michigan has lost what it will take years to regain. The high ways of the state, which once were thronged with the wagons of the pioneer, are left to loneliness and decay-property has depreciated -business been prostrated, and amid others, this increase of nominal taxation is by no means the least of the probable causes.

Another, and the only argument which can with propriety be used in the view of your committee, in favor of the present system is, that the state is thereby secure of the amount of her state tax.

While your committee would deprecate any modification of the tax laws which would tend to embarrass the finances of the state,' and in the slightest degree lead to prevent the safe and speedy collection of the revenue derived from the state tax-they at the same time can see no reason why the state, as a matter of right, can claim the control of the amount legitimately belonging to the counties. But a small portion of the amount of taxes is levied for state purposes. Those levied for county and township purposes, are usually four times the amount of the present state tax. The consequence is that in all counties where there is a large amount of non-resident lands, the state after receiving the returns, becomes largely debtor to those counties, while those counties in which there is less non-resident tax, are indebted to the state. The provisions of law are such that the counties depend upon their non-resident taxes to pay up the state tax,

and failing in this they become debtors to the state. The practical operation of it is, that to keep up the general fund, the state is obliged to borrow from the delinquent tax fund of one county to make up the amount which another county has failed to pay of her state

tax.

except that each That the duties of expenses attendant

Your committee believe that the whole system is wrong so far as it relates to returns of taxes to the Auditor General, and that a state has no financial claim upon the several counties, should pay its proportionate amount of state tax. the Auditor Ger.eral may be much simplified, the upon his office much decreased, and the state relieved from the management of a portion of the financial affairs legitimately belonging to the several counties, by the change proposed.

The Auditor General system, as it is called, was adopted at the organization of the state government; the inducements to establish that system are shadowed forth upon page 94, revised statutes. After the returns of taxes, state stocks were to be issued and sold in the city of Detroit or New York; immediately after such sale the counties were to be paid their quota. But the bubble burst-the visionary hopes of a sanguine people were destined never to be realized. The era of speculation was at an end—and each subsequent year has but shown more strongly the evils of such a system.

The tax laws have by each succeeding legislature been modifiedand change-change-change has appeared to be the ruling passion. Once during the past years of our history, the taxes were restored to the counties, (in 1842) but with a judgment law attached to them, which defeated in its operation the object contemplated. This law with its odious features is no test of a return to the county system. Before our organization into a state government that system prevailed, and your committee have no reason to believe it was other than salutary in its operation.

The present has undergone many changes, and from its complicated nature, must call for the action of the legislature from year to year. Not so with a plain system of taxation by counties disconnected with the state. No accounts would be needed with the counties, except so far as relates to the state tax. The amount apportioned to each county would annually be charged to the county, and the receipt of that amount would balance the account.

Now a large amount of state tax is paid in non-resident taxes-reverse the system, and the amount of state tax assessed upon residents might immediately be paid into the state treasury. There is no reason why the state should be embarrassed by the change. The amount of state tax is all which should ever be controlled by the state. The county tax belongs to the counties, and should be under their control. -and as money is paid in from time to time for the redemption of lands delinquent or sold for taxes, it may be remitted to the state treasury, until the whole amount of state tax due from each county is paid. The present is a time which calls for the adoption of a system, which, while it bears equally upon the interests alike of state and counties, should be so well matured, as to need but little, if any alteration. Our laws are undergoing a revision, and we are now called upon to legislate, not for a sudden emergency, but with a view to produce the desired result, permanency. Your committee believe that sudden changes should be avoided, and that a bad law well understood, may many times be better in its operation, than a good law little known. But, taking the view of the subject which has presented itself to the minds of your committee, they are compelled to believe that the present tax laws cannot remain permanent that the people of this state are hostile to the mystery which pervades the operations of the system now existing, and reported to us in the revision-and that the only hope of giving permanency to our tax laws, is by a radical divorce of the state from the county finances, and that the only accounts between state and counties, should arise upon the amount of state taxes apportioned to them respectively. Your committee are further instructed to inquire into the expediency of tax sales being made by townships-and from their examination of this branch. of the subject, are led to the conclusion, that such sales would be inexpedient-for the following, among other reasons:

The townships in which most of the lands of non-residents are situated, are sparsely populated, and bidders would hardly be found to purchase all, or the greater part of such lands. Being in many cases far removed from villages or the facilities of business, the officers of some of the townships in new counties, would not be likely to proceed with that accuracy important to sales of this kind. Such sales would necessarily be made without notice to the owners of the lands—or