The amount bid in each year by the state is affected somewhat by commercial conditions; but for years the laws were unquestionably impotent, and the amount of taxes for which land was taken over by the state increased from $38,588 in 1883 to $100,017 in 1890 and to $184,101 in 1895. The subject was vigorously attacked in 1895, and what is known as the Colquitt delinquent tax law was passed.2 This law was amended in 1897, and was responsible for an increase in redemptions and a decrease in sales to the state.3 The amount bid in by the state was $145,063 in 1896 and $107,185 in 1899. In 1900 there was the enormous amount of $379,346, but it declined to $99,915 in 1906; since then it has not fallen below $100,000. The right of a delinquent taxpayer to plead the statute of limitation as a defence against the payment of taxes was taken away in 1895.4 The features of the legislation of 1895 and 1897 were to substitute for the old process of seizure and sale by the collector the process of suit for the taxes in the district court in the name of the state, and if foreclosure were ordered, an order of sale followed and sale took place as in other cases of foreclosure. The law applied only to delinquent taxes since January 1, 1885, those before that date being relinquished because of the application of the statute of limitations.5

From 1881 to 1893 the rate of interest chargeable on back taxes at redemption was 8 per cent. In 1893 it was reduced to 6 per cent. Delinquents took advantage of the low interest rate to defer payment and lend at the higher commercial rates the money which they should pay for taxes. The Colquitt law left the rate at 6 per cent, but added a penalty of 10 per cent on the entire amount of accrued taxes, and otherwise sought to rob delinquency of its financial profitableness. In 1899 the financial profitableness was further discouraged by the provision that redemption might take place after one year only upon payment of double the amount of taxes, interest and penalty, and all costs.1 This double liability continued until 1907, when it was thought to be a deterrent to redemption, and was replaced by the provision that payment of the taxes for which sale was made, with interest at 6 per cent, all costs and a penalty of 10 per cent on the amount of the taxes would secure redemption for lands sold to the state or any city or town.2 But for lands sold for taxes and bought in by individuals the law was not changed and redemption may take place within two years upon payment of double the amount paid for the land.3

1 Comptroller's Report, 1881-2. Message of Governor Ross, January 20, 1887. Comptroller's Report, 1888. Galveston News, April 5, 1889. Comptroller's Report, 1889. Report of the State Revenue Agent, 1884. Message of Governor Culberson, January 16, 1895.

2 Houston Post, February 12, 1895. Laws of 1895, Reg. Sess., p. 50. Comptroller's Report, 1896.

3 Laws of 1897, Reg. Sess., p. 132. Comptroller's Report, 1898.

4 Laws of 1895, Called Sess., p. 6. Rev. Civil Stats., 1911, art. 7662. The act of July 4, 1879 (Laws of 1879, Called Sess., p. 15), however, denied application of the statute of limitation to taxes due the state, a county, city, or town. See Millinger v. City of Houston, 68 Tex., 37 (1887).

5 Rev. Civil Stats., 1911, arts. 7683-7699 and 7709.

Since 1895 there, has been a growing confidence in tax titles as attested by an increase in the number of sales to individuals of property foreclosed for taxes.4 The anomalous situation exists, however, that in the case of lands bid in by the state there is no statutory provision for their sale, except in the case of lands of non-residents of unorganized counties.5 It is alleged that the insufficient compensation of county and district attorneys when they bring suit and their exclusive power over enforcement have resulted in negligent enforcement of the lien of the state on real property.6 It was enacted in 1879 that all real and personal property of a person was liable for the state and county taxes due by him, including taxes on real estate and personal property, and the poll tax.1

1 Laws of 1899, p. 63

2 Laws of 1907, p. 282. Laws of 1909, p. 400. Laws of 1913, Called Sess., p. 25. Also Laws of 1905, p. 317, and Laws of 1901, p. 400. In 1902 thirty-six counties had not compiled records of delinquent as called for in the act of 1897, and in 1905 it was made their duty to do so. Laws of 1905, p. 318. Rev. Civil. Stats., 1911, arts. 7695, 7697. Comptroller's Report, 1902.

3 Rev. Civil Stats., 1911, art. 7696.

4 Comptroller's Report, 1899.

5 Report on Audit, Organization and Methods, 1909, pp. 79, 90, 91. It appears also that a tax title to unpatented school lands is a very cloudy one, and that the state's lien on such lands is very defectively secured. Ibid., p. 79.

6 Ibid.

Delinquency and insolvency constitute waste and loss to the state in the assessment and collection of taxes because assessors are compensated for the assessment of the property. It is desirable that delinquency especially should be vigorously combated. It is desirable also that the expense of getting the taxes into the treasury, or that the expenses of assessment and collection, should be at a minimum. In 1883 the compensation of assessors and collectors was graduated, but no maximum to what such officers could receive was prescribed.2 With the growth in taxable values and taxes collected, their pay became excessive in many instances.3 A reduction in collectors' fees was made in 1895.4 In the general revolt in 1897 against the abuses of the fee system, the fees of these officers were changed, and a maximum compensation was fixed.5 The maxima are graded roughly according to population of the counties, but in order that there may be an incentive for assessment and collection after the maxima have been reached, it is stipulated that each officer shall get one-fourth of the excess fees, the remaining three-fourths accruing to the county treasury.