Arkansas true Democrat., 1858-03-09

certain or fixed standard to ascertain the valne oi property, 1t might be we'll insisted. that if should be determined by it. But there is not It Is matter of opinlon-it is raised by circum stances, may be depressed in price to-day and enhanced Tn value tomorrow; and is seriously aHected hy the commercial revulsions of the country. No particular mode ofsascertaining the value IS, or indeed could well be prescribed oy the constitution without making it IS to that. code oI laws. It Was therefore left and wise- " ie,t to those to be taxed-the people-speaE 1 l'S through thelr representatives to adont tba oeSt houe or raising revenue for the wants of 9oVer"men1 m such sums and upon such objects as the public interest might indicate to be most proper and convenient
 In the attainment of that object. it is clear to my mind that the legislature may itself bv law TX specific value on property or on any par. 'lcuiar species of property, may establish maximum or minimum for the purposes of tax a'lo" or may vest the power of ascerta:ning the value Ill shentts or collectors; or vest it. in the county courts, or m boards of assessors or boards oi inspectors, or have the value ascertained Inv other agents, and in any manner that may h. prescHbed and the value thus ascert,neI whether It may be thought too high or too low becomes the true value within the meanin., of tue ec"liHti'ution And 1t Is eminently proper that tShouid be so, for papable reasons, that need not De here enumerated. "MpF5nq Ae same cyua1 ant "'.jo'm M'o@gboM he State." I do not uhueiSCand thIS restriction meaning any thing more chah that any property which is taxed; land, Tor example, shall not be taxed higher in one part of the State than another: that how ever, the Value may be ascertained, whether by the legislature directly, or through the medium oi tribunals or agents; land of the value of one thousand dollarsan the northern or eastern part oi tue otaie, subject to taxation shall not pay n greater or less rate on that value than land of the same Value In the southern or western part of the otate. give ths as an opposite illustration of what was realy intended by that restriction in the constitution. "No one species Of pyoDs,t, from, aoh'cb tar naaybe collected shaN be tare1 aiaher thaa anotser species cf property of equal vaiuev By which Is to be understood, as apprehend that, II, for example, negroes and horses are mahe taxable by law, no greater tax shall be ievled on one thousand dollars worth of land than on one thousand dollars worth of negroes or horses, and Dce Uersa; and so as to any other species or property, and thus securing unifor- mlty and equality n taxation. This has been necded to be the true construction of the con stltutlon in the case of 1He .Stote us C,itteoden
 
 reasoning of the court in Pike us The Stote , -Afh 2O5, tending to a different conclusion was pronounced erroneous
 [ am not aware that by any fair construction ol the constitution, the legislature would h, prohibited from conterring upon any particular | county or number Of counties the power of raising revenue by taxation, for the purposes of | Internal improvement in the county, or to pro- mole the focal interests of the county, or for county purposes.
 here lS for instance, a general law author lzlhg 'he counties respectively, herein it shall be deemed eXpelient, to levy d tax for the efectoh ol any public buildings, such as court i"istH, hiIS, clerks and recorders offices efc: D'gest 283 No one can doubs that it would pc competent tor the legislature if there was 'Io ch general law, to authorize any particular county 70 levy tax for such purposes; and be- cause one county might need court house. or other public buildings and require such law. TO one ever supprsel it would be obnoxious to objection, because all counties were not taxed Tor similar purpose. No one doubts, I SUD- pose that the legislature may lawfully author lAe single county or any number of counties. 10 levy road tax; as has been done in regard to many counties in this State Or it might authorize the levying of a tax for any other c"uHty purpose, or object, and designate the mode and manner uf assessment and collection.
 The rlVer counties, or any one of them embra- cling allnyial land may need leyeeS. and there fore require a law to collect a leyee tax, while other counties may require tax to construct or repar roads, remove Instructions from naviga- Die streams, build bridges aud the like; and such laws, although partlking of the nature of special legislation, are valid and obligatory.
 bY the act in question, the levee inspectors n Sol n lnH Hiras f hat l. benehtei by Ievee work, and their assessment made under oath, must contain lands of that description. In view of the difficulty of dacid- lng by any ordinary mode, what lands would De benehtei by levee work, it was intended to De, and was left 10 the sound discretion of the tve inspectors, elected by the people at short and stated periods, and they are in the words of the jaw, constituted "sole judges" of what lands would fall within that category, and be subject to assessment and taxed accordingly, subject only to the power of the boards of levee inspectors to adjust the assessment and levy of the tax, at the annual meeting in Nav "bv hearing and deciding all questions relating to the improper assessment and taxation of any IaHd, or the omission to assess and tax any land legally taxable under the provisions of the ac5 and % make additions to or dsduclons from the taxes Is charged in such list upon any land
 
 purpose "t a.iordug any person an opportunity to come forward and contest, notice is re- lu,re 10 be given, and the decision of the board ot Inspectors Is declared final, and conclu- Sire, and the land thus assessed and pass ed on and taxed is subject to the tax fixed: and t must be collected and paid over to the treasurer of the board. It is rue that under this act all the land, in the county may not be subject to levee tax; but oulv such as are beneii'e ed by levces; but this can hardly be urged as an objection against the law and being question ot policy and expediency, would not lh any event, touch it's coustituioualtv
 Upon Il carefu' col sil l.ratiou of the whole act l ann clearly of opinion thlt it is constitutional; that the taxes ioc levee purposes may be le- gally collected, and their collection enforced in the manner prescribed by that law. The first question, therefore, is answered n the affirma- tive.
 As tc the second question, I have to say that according to the decision of the Supreme Court, n the case last mentioned, all swamp and over flowed land, old by the State, and entered ante ror to the Huh of January 1855, is exempt from taxation for ten years from the date of entry, unless sooner reclaimed. Therefore, all swamp land purchased by individuals before that tune Is to be considered as exempt, and all after, as subject to the levee tax
 Very respectfully,
 Your obedient serv't
 $. H. HEM PSTEAD.
 Solicitor Generm of Afkansas
 
 COwhiGin0 hU a Fpp,ala