The Burlington weekly hawk-eye. [volume] (Burlington [Iowa]) 1860-1876, 1863-12-26
important Decision in relation
to DELINQUENT Taxes.

| Inc 1oloWlng decision of the Supreme
Court OF this State, is Of so much impor.
! tance to large class of property holders
| that we publish it in full: ~.
BARTRUFF v. REMEY.
1. RETROSPECTIVE statutes. That a stat
ute was designed to he retrospective in its
operations will not be implied when il does
not relate to subjects which would render
sucn construction necessary from consid-
eratlons OF public necessities. The general
RUE Is, that whenever the intention to
MAKE 1t retrospective in its operation is not
clearly expressed on its face, it will be con-
strued to commence after its enactment.
z. SAME: REVENUE ACT. The Revenue
act approved April Sth, 1862, IAN act to
amend chapter As Of the revision of 1860.
helng an act in relation to Revenue.-Chap,
lI3, Laws OF 1862 is not retrospective in it's
| operation and penalties incurred before
| the taking effect thereof upon taxes delin-
quent when it went into operation should
be assessed as prescribed by the law under
which it was incurred. sg
APpedl from Des Moines District Court.
Jhe facts are stated in the opinion of the
Court. sl 80 -
c. c. Nourse, for appellant.
d. Rorer, for the appellee
LOWE, J.-This is an amicable suit SUBJ
mltted upon an agreed statement Of facts,
IN which the court below is understood to
nave found for plaintiff, and defendent
appeals. aJ - tE 'sa,I5l- - :
Bartruff is in arrears for taxes upon two
lots in Burlington for the years 1858, 1859.
1860, 1851, all of which become DELINQUENT
prior 10 the 1st of March. 1862. The defen.
cent being Treasurer of Des Moines coun-
", claims to collect the penalties provided
by Sec. Is, of the session laws of 1862, page
2ee. Bartruff, the plaintiff, contends that
said section and its penalties are prospec-
tive, and apply only to taxes becoming de-
lmauent after the passage; therefore. ega
me object OF this proceeding is to obtain
judicial construction of the Revenue Sta
tute OF 1862, above referred to-, and to de-
termlne whether the same is retrospective
SO as to bring taxes delinquent prior to its
enactment within it's penalties
We remark, first, that there is class of
cases or objects requiring legislative relief
or assistance, in which it is not only COM
petent, but where from considerations of a
controlling public necessity, it would seem
to be the dictate Of wisdom that the law
making body should give to their enact
ments retrospective operation. Aside
| from this class of cases, within which the
| statute in question does not fall, the gener.
al tendency Of the judicial mind has been
| and that, too, with great steadiness of pur.
pose, both in England and this country, tc
hold that unless the retrospective intention
OF the Legislature is clearly expressed up.
on the face of the enactment, it shall be
| deemed to commence IN futar0. Now there
/ IS nothing in the Revenue Act approved
April Sth, 1862 from which it can be rea.
sonably inferred that the General Assem-
bly, meant it to operate retrospectively, ant
we are not at liberty, under the principle
The Treasurer, therefore, of Des Moines
county is not authorized TO enforce the pen
| altles of this statute against TAXPAYER!
who became delinquent anterior to tn,
time of its taking effect as a law.
The submission in this case and tn,
Judgment Of the court thereon, are botl
more or less implicit as it is claimed, an(
the last assignment charges that the cour
erred in not determining whether tn,
plaintiff was liable to pay penalties for hi
default in the event the provisions of the
act of 1862 were inapplicable, and we ar,
asked not to leave this question open an(
unsettled stsa.
Section IS of the act of 1862 repeals tn,
:. penalty on delinquent taxes contained il
Sec. 760 of the Revision of 1860, subject
however, to the saving clauses of Sec. 20
OF the Code, which read as follows:
"The repeal of a statute does not reviv,
!. a statute previously repealed, nor does sucl
repeal affect any right which accrued, any
duty imposed, any penalty incurred, no.
any proceeding commenced, under and by
virtue Of the statute repealed"
The provisions Of this section cOntinu,
the right to enforce the penalties that shal
have accrued under repealed statutes; 81
that it becomes the duty of the collector
whenever a new Revenue Law is passet
prospective in its operation according t,
the rule above suggested, .changing tn
penalty upon delinquent taxes. to collec
such penalties by virtue of the law unde
which they were incurred. This rule o.
construction makes the duty of county col
lectors plain one, and easily to be under
stood by all parties interested, whilst i
carries out the intent of the makers
The judgment will be affirmed, but ren
dered up in this court in such form a
fully to set forth the exposition herein Civ
en- of the question presented. Affirmed.