Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1856-02-14
Opinion Of the Attorney General
On tho Csnstitutionaiity Of the Tepth
ScCticp rt The rax Law.

SiN:---l have the honor to acknowledge
| the receipt of copy Of a resolution yr th-
lHouse requiring me to communicate 70 il,
my op'nion as to the constitutionaltv ru
the tenth section Of the tax Inv, yasses
f, April 18Th, 1862.
1 can but feel great reluctance ia-~c1m
I.py!ng with this resolution, Tor the reason
that this question has been pissed upon Jy
! ttssisu-seAas~. sk ofabs Ssa.e. aa,lel a g
tuly aware OF The, at least seeming, pre-
sumption of attempting to c.ucida,c qucs
tiOn that has been adjud.ca,ed by ina,
| tribunal. Bu. ! have no cholce in view
Of the provisions of the law prescribing
my duties, but to comply with the require.
ment Of the House.
!, however, EEL less embarrassment, I'D
On the subject from the fact that in the
case reported, in which it was passed upon
pv the Supreme Cour', it was not directly
before the Court for adjudication, and.
therefore, according to the universally re-
celved rule, in such cases, the opinion ex-
pressed does mot have that absolute and
binding force which it would possess in a
case directly involving the question.
have given to the eu5ject careful and
patient examination, and without pretend
ing to 90 into all the details of subject
which has been SO fully and nby treated
of by eminent ts4sRs in the case above
referred to, lssubmit the following reasons
wnv. in my opinion, the section of the law
referred to, is not inconsistent with the
provisions Of the Constitution Of the State.
Tne only objection taken to this section
of the tax law, is that it allows deductions
OF debts to b, N .dn from credit, in listing
property for taxation.
The provision o, the Constitution ap-
plIcable to this subject, sec, 4 Of art. II,
provides: that "LlVs shall be pissed tax
ing, By a uniform rule, all moneys, credits,
investments in bonds, stocks, jont stock
companies or otherwise; and ais2 all real
and personal property accorling to is true
value in money" &c. What is meant by
| the term "credits," as here used! Does it
mean notes, accounts, bills, &C., the eui-
dences Of credits specifically, and mat which
they only represent and evidence! Does
it mean. all nogiaal credits or actual ha.
ances and dues, strictly SO, and indepen.
dent Of the instrument which may repre-
sent him! A credit is properly defined to
be ga sum Of mJney due 10 any per on.''
Hence | infer that TIE term credit, as used
| in this clause OF the Constitution, m ~ and
should be, cons ruei to mean, the sum due
an indvidu after dcluctjmg VII 1t he owe =.
| II not, and tn, w1rl ALL is to b. TAKEN
| in its broaIest, m lst literal s,nse, can
see no reason why in every case Of mlt IA
accounts where indyduaIs have standin
upon their books dei5 and credit items,which
are unldjustG4, they should MT be require
( to list the debi side o. what is nominqllp
and not really due ra,m for taxation. with
out striking the balance and datuc,ing whit
stands upon the other side. Such 1cHn-
structon would tie alike unrIas)l )la5le an
absurd, and would violate the we'll known
rule, ;hat surh construction shali be given
to laws and coastj!uiions as shall reader
them both just and reasonable in their op.
GRAFTON. On the other hand, ii any class
OF debts MY be deducted why not all! /
a person cin deduct what he owes TO one,
who in turn owes him, why may he not,
upon the sane principle, the debts he owes
those who d. 10: hlppen to owe him? Il
seems to M it will be evident from these
Considerations that to hold that tho term
sal Credits" Us used in the Constitution,
means eV,ry thing eVincing debt, appar-
emily and nominally dae an inIiviluil with
out deduction, is a pevcrsion of the well
known and generally received commercial
meaning of the term, which is, that the
credits one owns, in the general 'nse, a'e
! the balances due him after Geducting what
he owes.
In case OF this kind, where there ID
doubt as to the true construction, the rule
is undoubtedly that that construction ought
to prevail whlGb sRilL- work the least in.
justice and public Inconvenience.
Chief Justice Mrshall, in one case says:
"It is true that when great Inconvenience
will result from particular construction
that construction ought to De avoiGed, IN
'ess the meaning of the Legislature be plain
in which case it is TO be'obeycd - Crancl
2ss.
\ In the case OF the People v, Canal Com
mtsSonerS, Scammon 100, it was held
"Phat, if it were apparent that by a pnr'
/, tlcular CONSTRUCTION VI law, III upho'
full case, such construction would be likely
to endanger or actually sacrifice great pub
lie interests, it would not ana ought moi
10 be intended, that such construction
was ,ntcmpated by the Leg stature in dis
regard OF such interest" or course this
rule only applies in cases where there il
doubt as to the intention Of the law max
ing power, but in all such cases it applies
and should govern and control the cpnstruc
, ton. That there is doubt in this case, !
aoundantly evidenced, bs The diverse oPn
ions of the able iudges who have passed
upon it, and that such construction works
great injustice, is equally evident, and !
, seems to me that the contrary one is boii
; lust a. reasonable, and fairly deducible fron
E the languaga usei.
+, An additional reason why this conelusicl
, is correct, is found in the terms used II
a. section 3, of the same article, in regard t
= the taxation of banks, which provides
"That the General Assembly shall proyld
a By law, for taxing the notes and bills, dis
;. counted or purchased, iaoneys loaned, an