Daily union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1865-1866, 1866-03-30
especially,
NJ. Natl. BRowN. Mayor.

To rHE MAYOR AND FINANCE COMMITTEES or THE
CRY on acknowledgements; You have re-
quested us to give you our opinion professionally,
whether the Corporation of Nashville has the
right to collect frtm delinquent tax payers the ar
rears Of taxes for the last three or four years. We
understand hom you that many Of our largest
property holders have failed TO pay their taxes for
those years snd now insist that they ought not 10
be required &c pay them, because the property upon
which the ta,es are assessed was IN whole or in
part, during al or portion Of the peroid m the
possession AMI occupancy Of the military auth0ri-
ties of the United States and has yielded 10 the tax
payers no income. You admit of the existence
among these OF cases OF great hardship which
strongly appeal 20 your sympathies, but you con-
slider that all Of our citizens have suffered more or
less from the tame cause and that even handed
justice can only be attained by prop9ruSnlng the
utterly hopeless task. Besides, as we understand,
the amount o. these taxes is absolutely required
70 enable you 2 carry on the mnnlclpal go.erni
into in the discharge Of your duties. and that II
these taxes cannot be collected. the same amount
must Be raised by new leyies; aS9 = have Az dc
and only wish TO know what L IS.
We have carefully examined the. question, and
arr, Of the opinion, that the cooperation has the
right TO collect the arrears of taxes for those
years A tax imposed according 10 It's charter by
a municipal ctTporation becomes q debt from the
eiti1sn 70 the corporation. Inc anoest o. sile
the assessment Is made. without reference 90
whether Il produces income or not, and the night
10 collect thc TAX - indclenoento OF tue ucN vI tN-
use Of the PROPERTY or of subsequent events. The
corporation has nothing TO do with the owner 6
management Of bis property, or with any OF the
casualties incident 10 ownership. The fact that
property has nos yielded an income. although the
owner may have had every reason 20 suppose IL
would, is assuredly no legal ground for resisting
the collection tf taxes. Neither is the destruction
of the prOpert, by IRE its righttul seizure by
che Government OF its illegal seizure in any way
whatsoever. tSen IL the corporation were bound
20 protect the property from the particular act
its failure 90 do SO might give an independent
right Of actiOa 70 the owner for redress. but
would be no defense against the payment of taxes.
Besides, Il is most obvious that the protection Of
properly frIm ilse by the government is no part
| Of the duty of. corporation. The United States
Is entitled 70 take the property Of the citizen for
public use. while the eitHen Is. on the other hand.
entitled 10 Just compensation Tor such property.
The city Of Nashville, in lis corporate capacity.
has nothing 70 10 with the adjustment 9th rea-
tive rights Of 10 citizens and the General Govern
ment. Whatever eject. therefore, any Of the
events OF the last few yeau might have, upon Al
application 40 lie relieved ~ matter Of favor we
are clearly % opinion that they can have none
upon the legR liability Of the tax paper. Re
| specifically. W. =, CooFER,
JORDAN Stokes.
EDWARD II. EAST.
NASHVILLE. March %. ls66.