Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1859-06-21
ma, mENEEs.


The Clarksville Chronielt has done Dr. MESEEs
great injustice in attempting to prOduss the i'm
preston that he opposed the policy of exempting
the property Of schools and colleges from taxation.
If the Chronicle entertains for Doctor ~ those feel
ings of kindness which 1t prOfesses,f ii is infu-
enced BY that spirit Of eandor and firmness which
should characterize public journsl--if not msled
by prejudice or other less worthy mctiyes-it will
hasten TO repair that injustice by publication
Of the following exposition of the facts derived d.
reCtly from the public records:
BY the Act Of 1855. Chapter IS Cses NichOl-
son and Caruthers, page 6O2.l
can lands within this State, now held, or which
may hereaft er be held, by any person or persons
for the use of any religious society for the purpose
Of having thereon any church, meeting house or
other building for public worship; all lands which
have heretofore been, or may hereafter be, apprc-
pristsd for the use of schools which may be held
by any person persons, in trust, for The use of
any college, academy or other seminary Of eduea-
tlon in this State" "are exempted from the
payment Of any Stale, county or other tax"
This old law was brought forward in the Code
and passed as part Of the same. The Code, as
acted upon in the Senate, was embraced in Senate
Bill No. sc. Now, by reference to original Senate
Bill No. Sc, ION file in the Stats Library pags ia
the section exempting the property of schools and
churches win be found there just in the same words
asin the printed Code, page liz, viz
''Of the property above enumerated, the following
shall be exempt from taxation:
''S. All property Of any literary, scientific, or
benevolent INSTITUTIONS actually used for the pur
poses for which such institution was created unless
it is invested in stocks or employed in any other
thsn the regular business Of such Institution.
~. All houses of religious worship and their sp
purtenaRces
and held in trust for the of college, academy
or other seminary of education"
This section was embraced in apart xiii Of SEN
ate Bill No. &C. to revise the Statutes of Tennessee"
as appears from the index and memorsnda Of the
Clerk of the Code Committee, ION file in the State IL
brary) and the memoranda of the Clerk Of the Sen
ate which we're attached to the Bill as passed in the
Senate, and are also on fle in the State Library.
The final action of the Senate on this portion Of
the Code is given on page 73S, Senate Journal, as
follows:
"The question recurring on the passage of the
Bill part xii and xiii of Senate Bill, No. Sc, to
revise the Statutes Of the State of Tennessee passed
the third and last reading" Ayes Is. Noes :.
DR.. MESEEs is recorded as voting in the afirma-
tive
Thus We find that DR.. MENIEE on the 18th day
of March, 1865 voted for part xiii Of Senate Bill
No. sc, embracing provision exempting the pro
pe1ty Of literary and religious institutions from
taxation Ii passed the Senate partly by his vote
On the Goth of March, nine days after the pas
sage Of this Law, an amendment was offered in the
Senate to Senate Bill, 28l, providing for the exemp
ton of the property Of Schools, Churches &C., from
taxation -[See Senate Journal, page 800.
Dr. MEREEs voted agSinst these amendments be-
cause all the property embraced in them were al
ready exempted from taxation by bill which had
passed the Senate nine days before, and for which
he had voted
The law for which DIR. MENEss voted exempting
church and college property from taxation was en-
braeed as we have said in Senate Bill, No. sc, and
is published in the Code, page l72. The amend
ments which he voted aginst, are attached to Sen
ate Bill, No 2s1, and published in the "PUBLIC
AcIs OF THE Stats OF TENNEssEE, PASSED AT
THE FIsr SESSION OF TIE THIRTY-SEcoND GES
ERAL AssEMsLI."-Psges 4l5-l6.
This is the whole story. DR.. MENEEs voted
against the amendments The 10Th of March, be-
cause the provisions they contained were embraced
in law which passed on the 18th of March.
We stated in our former article this subject that
the section of the Code embracing this exemption
clause passed the Senate early in the session. We
we're mislsd by the fact, that part first of Code
embraced this section, and part first of Senate Bill,
which we had supposed was the same as part first
of Code, passed the Senate on the 18th day of
November '56, near the beginning of the session.
We fnd on examination Of the original Bill that so
much of Part first of Code as refers 10 property
exempt from taxation, was embraced in part xiii,
of senate Bill which passed on the llth Of March,
as before stated.
The acy is immaterial SO far as DR.. Me-
xEEs is concerned, for the showing above given
from the record establishes the point made in our
former article viz that the Law exempting college
and church property from taxation was passed be-
fore the amendment containing the same provision
was offerel. Every who reads these facts will
see that Dr. MESEEs acted like discreet legislator
throughout this whole matter. We hOpethe authors
Of the charge will now withdraw It,