The south-western. [volume] (Shreveport, La.) 1852-1870, 1869-01-06
The One Per Cent, Tax.

Hampton Bradley VS.. T. J. Hghtower Sheriff and
Tax Collector-In Parish Court BienviIe parish State
of Louisana.-This suit commenced by an Injunction
sued out by plaintiff restraining the sale of property
seized by defendant for aledged to be due under
the provisions of act of the legislature approved
September 2sth 1863 and popularity known as the one
per cent. tax act
The defendant moves to dissolve the Injunction upon
the plea that there is no legal for injunction
shown by the petition. The plaintiff contends that the
statute levyng the tax is unconstitutional and void be-
cause it is retroactive in its operation and relies upoG
articles 10 and Is of the constitution of 1868
Article l 10 provides, among other things that no
retroactive law shall be passed This principle which
only applicable to the judicial construction and
execution of laws prior to the constitution of 1861 and
1868 applied by those instruments to their enact.
ment. Aud the legislature is now as poworless to
pass retroactive law as the under article of
the civil code to give to any law retroactive ef
feet But it contended by tie defense that the act
in question is not retroactive, and the opinion Of the
ma ory OF the Supreme Court of the State as deiv-
cred by Justice Spoord in the case of munieipality
No. vs.. Wheeler II Blake 10 A. 745, is relied on in
support Of this position. In that case the very cues
ton at issue the eonstitutonay of INV admitted
to be retroactive, and the only question decided was
that the legislature then had power to pass such law
not being Inhibited, as now, by the constitutions the
object of the statute then in contest being retrospect
/ lively to egaise invalid municipal tax ordinance
and all expressions of the court not touching the main
issue may be dSregar6ed obtcr 3icta Hence there
is nothing in the remark of the Judge that the law
strictly speaking was not retrospective for this remark
ITSELF implies that it III retroactive and
that was the very point upon which the decision turned
The only ground upon which the constitnonality of
the law in that disputed by Judge Buchanan
dissenting, was that the legislature sought thereby to
exercise judicial power by giving to municipal ord
| nance retroactive effect.
In the opinion of the above cited it is remark
ed By the Judge that the point ruled in 9th An 6l0
has application to that case because the municipal
ty there attempted without any legislative auhorisa-
ton to revive back taxes which had been remitted
Now taxes be liqudated by remission can they
not be extnguished by payment? If municipal
corporation could not revive back which had been
RENTED without authorsation tor the reason that it
woud have been retroactive, for the same reason it
could not have revived taxes that had been paid nor
legislature that is Inhibited by the constitution
from retroactive legislation revive taxes which have
been paid; and it is presumed that the taxes Of 1867
have been paid.
Thus far this opinion has been confined to the first
point relied on hut there is much force in the second:
| namely, article lis of the Constitution, which saws
property shall be taxed according to its value to 30
ascertained directed by law hare been ascer
tanned directed by law; but ascertaned under the
provisions of the law which levics the tax or law
that operates subsequently thereto. The assessment
| of 1867 made for the purpose of fixing the
amount of taxes to be paid by each property holder
for that year, according to law previously passed
If the legislature can now go back and levy anothcr
tax properly according to that assessment they may
| levy tax ON the assessment of 1860 as has been
justly argued by counsel when lands on the Misss-
sppi worth hundred dollars per acre. which are
| now worth not more than ten.
If this law had been passed in the year $685. it
would have been prospective, but having been passed
| in 1868, 1t is retrospective.
| Taxes due to the government which exists and
as it exists at the time they are levied and not to
subsequent government. If the territory of Louisiana
had belonged to France in 1867 and had been ceded
to the United States 1865 could it be contended that
legislature to whom the power to pass retroactive
law denied, could levy tax upon an assessment
made while it was under that government? | think
not AS to the meaning of the term retroactive the
case of municipality N. vs.. Michoud, An 6lo re-
lied on by the plaintiff is in point See also 10 An.
| sos.
The on gross sales is not authorised by the terms
! of the act itself.
1t is therefore ordered, adudged and decreed that
| the motion to dissolve the injunction be overrued.
| A CARD FROM J. MARSHALL HANNA.-J MARSHALL
Hanna the associate editor of the Southern Opinion,
publishes the following card in the Richmond papers
was the associate editor Of the Southern Opinion;
such wrote the most Of the original articles that
have appeared in its columns. Much wrote of my
own voton, and moreIa wrote BY special direction of
the cditor-inchief prepared that article which cost
the editor his life IL prepared by his drec
/ on. Afterwards convinced that its publication would
be impoltie, if not unsafe, asked that the article
might be modified, expnnged altogether the names
left blank, filled with initials that would have left
the without local habitation.n The article had
passed from the control Of the associate it then
the property OF the editor-to print withhold He
was responsible not 8; and no matter how much /
had desired the assumption, H. Rives Pollard always
assumed, and never eyaded theresponsibty of every
| line and paragraph printed in the Opinion. II am
responsihe was bis insariabe response TO applicants
/ for redress.
I No. the hlood If TI Rire, Pollard apr Jota aecoo;