The Worthington Advance

The Mill Tax—Why is it not Collected?—Why the Farmers must pay such High Taxes.

When Dan Rohrer was up as a candidate for County Attorney he remarked that if elected he would collect the tax against the Okabena Mill in twenty-four hours. He has been County Attorney now for one year and has made no effort that any one knows of to collect the tax. Let us look at the history of the matter a little so that the farmers may see why they pay such high taxes and how a man whom they elected to office does his duty:

In the fall of 1875, the Okabena Mill in Worthington, was sold for the taxes of 1874, and bid in by the State for $784.77, the amount due for taxes and costs. Proceedings in Court were instituted by C. Z. Sutton through Rohrer, his attorney, to set aside this tax on the ground of irregularities of the taxing officers, and Judge Dickinson, by an order dated Feb. 21, 1876, denied the motion and affirmed the tax. From this decision of Judge Dickinson, Rohrer appealed, as usual, to the Supreme Court and in Feb., 1877, that appeal was dismissed, and Rohrer was beaten as is usual when he appeals to the Supreme Court. The tax therefore remained in full force, and bore interest at the rate of two per cent. per month, which at the present time would amount in all, for that year to over $1,600.

The tax of 1875 on the mill property was $507.56, and on account of a defect in the description was set aside by judgment of Court dated Sept. 24, 1877. On account of this defect, under the tax law, the taxing officers are empowered to enforce such tax in a subsequent year, so that the property shall not escape taxation from such defective description. This was done and therefore the $507.56, with ten per cent interest, also became a tax lien on the property, and would now amount to about $1,050.

The tax on this property for the years 1876, 1877, 1878 and 1879 could not be much less than that of 1874, and would now amount to not less than $3,000.

From this it will be seen that the total tax unpaid on the mill is at least $5,650.

We understand on inquiry that there has been no redemption from these taxes and no assignment by the State of the rights acquired under tax judgments and sales, and therefore the title is apparently absolute and confirmed in the State.

This valuable property is now leased by E. F. Drake, who claims to be the owner, to Lowe & Anderson, and Mr. Drake is receiving the rents and no effort is being made to collect from such rents the taxes due nor to take control of the mill. Practically it is held and run as free from all taxes as though it were railroad land.

County Attorney Rohrer was attorney for C. Z. Sutton in his proceedings to get rid of these taxes and we understand that he is now riding over the St. Paul & Sioux City road on a pass, indicating that he is an attorney for the road. Whether he will appear for the road, or rather for its President, in case the collection of the tax is further resisted, we cannot say, but it appears that he has decided not to do his duty as County Attorney and enforce the collection of the tax.

The statute plainly provides for collecting taxes in such a case from the rents. No wonder the taxes of the farmers are so high when the tax of nearly $6,000 against a heavy concern like the mill goes uncollected through the neglect of a County officer to do his duty.

The salary of the County Attorney was raised $100 when Rohrer came in, and the office has been for him past year practically a sinecure, for Rohrer has done nothing beyond drawing his salary and giving advice occasionally to the detriment of the county.