Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1869-07-07
IMPORTANT DECISION.

w PuOioii Cilo loilOTIilSS ue0lo4oh
of the Supreme Court of this State in
the case of the Liberal Institute, AT
Jefferson, against certain tax payers
of the town of Jefferson, who had re-
sisted the collection Of tax upon their
property, authorized by act of the Leg
islature. This decision has a local sig
nifcance to property holders in this
city, as it is thought that it may have
an effect upon portion of our city in
debtedness:
S. S. Cnrtis, Administrator, &C., Res on
dent, vs.. Zebulon Whipple and others, APP
pellants.
BY DIXON, c. J.
The counsel for the plaintiff correctly
states the effect of the act of incorpora-
ton { Pr. and Local Laws, 1866, CHI.
516,) when they say that the jefferson
Liberal Institute, for the benefit OF which
the taxes In question were attempted to
be assessed and collected is essentially
q private educational institution. con
trolled exclusively by the stockholders,
through board Of trustees. The town
OF Jefferson IS not a stakeholder and
has no voice in its management. The
taxpayers in the town as such are not
stockholders and have no privileges in
the Institute that are not common to
all the people of this or any other State.
The trustees may exclude any or all of
the citizens of the town from the insti-
tuition. The money when collected is
to be paid to the treasurer of the Tnsti
tute aud the town is not secured the
right to see or know that it is expend-
ed for the purpose for which it was col
lected. Under these circumstances we
feel no doubt in saying that the act
{ Pr. and Local Laws, 1867, Oh. 1917
and its amendment ( Pr and Local Laws,
1868, CHI. 3D. under which the pre-,
ceedings to levy and collect the suppos-
ed tax, are attempted to be justified,
are unconstitutional and void. 1t
strikes US sat the first blush" that this
is not The levy and collection of money
for public purposes as clearly as if the
Institute were not an incorporated body,
but mere association Of private indi-
v,duals resolved upon the establishment
OF like institution. IF it were such
an institution or a grammar or classical
school, or seminary, built up and es-
tablished by individual enterprise, as by
persons engaged in profession of teach
ing or by others, and owned and CON
trolled by those contributing towards
it and the emoluments belonging to
them, we apprehend that no one would
contend that the people of Jefferson
might be taxed for the purpose Of do
mating the money to it. The fact that
it is an institution incorporated by act
act Of the legislature does not change it's
character in this respect. It is but
most frivolous pretext for giving to
corporation where there is no certain
and definite personal responsibility,
money exacted from the taxpayers
which a just and honorable man en-
gagged in the same business would hest
tate to receive though paid without OPP
position, and who to enforce the pay
mcnt Of it against the will of the tax
payers, would never think Of resorting
to coercive measures, provided the same
we're lawful. It can no more be support.
cd by taxation than if it were unincor-
porated or a private school or seminary
Of the kind above supposed. Nor will
the location of the institution a. Jeffor-
son and the incidental benefits which
Eay thereby arise to the people of the
town, sustain the tax. That is not the
kind ofprblic benefit and interest which
will au thoriZ8 a resort to the power of
taxation. Such benefits accrue to the
people Of all communities from the ex-
ercise in their midst OF any useful trade |
or employment, and the argument, pur
sued to its logical result, would prove |
that compulsory payment of taxation
might be made use Of for the purpose
of building up and sustaining every
such trade or employment, though
carried on by private persons for private
ends or the purposes ofmere individual
gain and en- Jlument. Thatthere exists
in the State no power to tax for such
purposes, is proposition too plain
to admit Of controversy. Such power
would be obviously incompatible with
with the genius and institutions of a
free people, and the practice of all libe-
raj governments as we'll as all judicial
authority, is against it. If we turn to
the cases where taxation has been sus-
tanned as in pursuance of the power, we
shall fad in every one of them that
there was some direct advantage accru-
ing to the public from the outlay, either
by its being the owner or part owner Of
the property OF thing to be created or
with the money, or the party
interested in and benefited
by the work to be performed, the same
being matters OF public concern, Or be-
cause the proceeds of the tax were to
be expended in defraying the legitimate
expenses Of government and in promot-
ing the peace, good order and welfare
of society. Any direct public benefit
o. interest Of this nature, no matter how