The waste, loss, and cost incident to assessment and collection of taxes - including poll and occupation - was 18 per cent of the taxes assessed in 1882; 19.6 per cent in 1887; 18.4 per cent in 1891; 22.3 per cent in 1895; 23.8 per cent in 1900; 16.5 per cent in 1905; 16.2 per cent in 1910, and 16.1 per cent in 1915. The high percentages in 1895 and 1900 were due to the great increase in delinquent and insolvent ad valorem and poll taxes, and the improvement since has been due to the reduction in expenses, delinquency and insolvency. The per cent of expenses, which are mainly the commissions paid for assessment and collection, to gross collections on the tax roll, by which is meant assessed taxes less erroneous assessments and insolvent and delinquent taxes, was 10.4 in 1887; 10.6 in 1891: 11.7 in 1895; 7.6 in 1900; 7.3 in 1905; 9.1 in 1910, and 6.6 in 1915. The effect of the fee legislation of 1897 is evident in the decline after 1895.

1 Laws of 1879, Reg. Sess., p. 6. Rev. Civil Stats, of 1895, art. 5176; Rev. Civil Stats., 1911, art. 7630. This article reads as follows: "All real and personal property held or owned by any person in this state shall be liable for all state and county taxes due by the owner thereof, including taxes on real estate, personal property and poll tax; and the collector of taxes shall levy on any personal or real property to be found in his county to satisfy all delinquent taxes, any law to the contrary notwithstanding." See also art. 7528.

2 Laws of 1883, pp. 35, 101.

3 Report of State Revenue Agent, 1894.

4 Laws of 1895, Reg. Sess., p. 180.

5 Laws of 1897, Called Sess., p. 5.

The compensation of assessors is based on the total of assessed taxes, one-half of which is paid by the state and one-half by the county. The fee of five cents for assessing each poll is paid by the state. The history of the division of costs is that in 1850 the county tax was limited to one-half of the state's, and the division of the costs on an equal basis of half and half was thought to be reasonable. This continued to be the rule until 1861, when a change was made, but in 1866 it was again provided that each should pay the same. Under the Constitution of 1869 the fees of assessment and collection might be added to the taxpayer's bill, and though this was enacted, it was repealed immediately and a division of the costs was made, one-third to be borne by the county and two-thirds by the state.1 This division remained the rule from 1871 until 1897, when the present apportionment of half and half was enacted. This division was fair enough as long as the state and county rates were equal or nearly so, but since county rates have increased beyond the state rates the state's share of the expense is unduly large. It would seem fairer that the expense should be prorated according to the interest which each has in the services rendered. It is asserted that the compensation of collectors in the richer counties is more than adequate, in the poorer counties less than sufficient; and that the surplus fees turned into the county treasury enable some counties to be at no expense for the collector's office.2 Furthermore, the graduation of the collector's fees, compensating them highly (5% and 4%) for the first and easiest collections and much less (1%) in the larger totals which are accomplished by some effort and unpleasantness usually deters collection of delinquent taxes.1 It is apparent that some reform is needed, and those suggested are putting the officers on a salary basis, or having the entire expense borne by the counties, or separating state and local sources of revenue.2

1 That part of the act of April 22, 1871, which imposed as an additional tax the fees of a justice of the peace for making assessment was repealed by the act of November 29, 1871.

2 Report on Audit, Organization and Methods, 1909, pp. 80-1.

Also there is loss to the state and, in addition, injustice to taxpayers as a result of failure to list property and of undervaluation of that which is listed. Both non-rendition and undervaluation have characterized the operation of the property tax throughout the period 1880-1915.3

In the assessment of real estate there has been perennial undervaluation. The United States Census of 1890 gave as the true valuation of taxable real estate, $1,130,3-11,854, but the assessed value of the same was $523,893,098, or 46.3 per cent. In 1904 the true value as given by the census was $1,554,714,941, and the assessed value of all taxable real property was $705,788,721, or 45.3 per cent.1 In 1912 the estimated true value of all real property was $3,608,063,739, while the assessed value of all taxable property was $1,650,198,381, or 45.6 per cent.2 It has long been the practice of county assessors and commissioners' courts to protect their counties against state taxation by low valuations and high county rates, or by such valuations as are sufficient at the existing rates to yield the necessary county revenue. Non-rendition of money, credits and securities is the result of the intangible character of such property and of the high rates of taxation.

1 See special articles by Lloyd P. Lochridge in the Austin Statesman, January 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 25, 26, 27, 1913. For legislation of 1913 relating to the fees of assessors and collectors see Laws of 1913, Reg. Sess., p. 246. See also Rev. Civil Stats., 1911, arts. 3871, 3881-3883.

2 Report of the grand jury of Travis county, in the San Antonio Express, April 30, 1916. The grand jury favored putting all officers on a salary basis, and cited the activity of the fee officers at the 1915 session of the legislature. See discussion fee system, ante.

3 Messages of Governor Ireland, January 15, 1885, and January 11, 1887. Message of Governor Ross, January 20, 1887. Report of the Comptroller, 1888. Supplementary Report of the State Revenue Agent, 1892. Galveston News, February 11, 1893. Report of the Comptroller, 1898. Report of the State Revenue Agent, 1898. Messages of Governor Sayers, January 10, 1901, and January 16, 1903. Report of the Special Tax Commission, 1899. Reports of the comptroller, 1902 and 1904. Message of Governor Lanham, January 12, 1905. Messages of Governor Campbell, January 16 and April 16, 1907, and January 14; 1909. Messages of Governor Colquitt, January 18 and February 22, 1911, January 16, 1913, and January 12, 1915. Flagrant undervaluation is illustrated in the case of a farm purchased by the prison commissioners. The state, through the commissioners, paid $100,000 for 2,715 acres, but the entire tract of 7,831 acres out of which the state's purchase was taken had been rendered for taxes at only $53,080; House Journal, 34th Leg., Reg. Sess., p. 442.