Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1870-02-18
inflicted. See blackwell on Tax Titles, PIP.

inflicted. See blackwell on Tax Titles, PIP.
% and 80.
Another eminent writer saws: "Forfeit-
ure of rights or property cannot be adj
judged by legislative act, and cOnfseation
without a judicial hearing and judgment
after due notice would be void, as not due
process of law. Co0ley's constitutional
Law, page 1852.
Again Blackwell says: $50 cautious are
the courts in combining the taxing power
within the bounds Of State necessity, that
they will ave permit the enforcement Of
a penalty, or double tar, in a
manner, under the vague and indefinite
pretense of taxation
The court has diligently examined our
Legislative enactments from the earliest
period of our State government to the
present time, and can find nothing in the
previous history and customs Of our own
state to warrant or justify the act in ques-
ton. It is true that most OF our revenue
law provided that parties who did not
report their lands to the Assessor should
pay a double tax; but great care was
taken to provide for a careful assessment
of the double tax, and tha due notice
should be given thereof, and that tho
party assessed should have an OppOrtuni-
ty of appearing before some court and
have the double tax RENTED.
This system OfdOuble taxing, under u
old revenue laws, was confined to ad pa
loren taxation, which, from the care
taken in the assessment, and the public
notice required, was much less liable TO
abuse than the power Oftaxing privileges.
In every instance prior to the law in ques-
ton, the privilege tax was enforced only
by direct collection of the tax. and by
penalties and forfeitures to be collected of
of the offending parties through the regu-
lar courts, by jury trial.
If when the taxing power Of the Gov
eminent was so lightly used and the de-
mands of the State upon its people were
but a pittance as was b case heretofore,
50 much care was used to guard the citi-
zen from undue eXactions and unlawful
deprivatiOns of property, how should the
matter now stand when the taxing power
is welded with q heavy hand and the
public dues have become oppressive bur-
thens to the people7
The power granted by the Constitution
to the Legislature to tax merchants,
peddlers and privileges in such manner as
they may from time to time direct " is a
fearful one, and greatly liable to abuse.
A summary assessment and collection of
such taxes when levied is all that can be
asked-all that can be justified by custom
or precedent.
Shall our Legislature be permitted to
clothe a mere clerk, a person unlearned
in the law, and frequently arbitrary and
presumptuous, not only with the power
to assess and summarily collect such a
tax from our merchants, frequently
amounting TO thousands of dollars, but
also empower him TO sit in judgment, and,
without notice, without trial q without
jury, decide upon infractiOns of the law
and inhiet heavy and ruinOus penalties
and forthwith collect them by this sharp,
severe and summary process? Such a
law is unwarranted by precedent and Gus
tom, not demanded by public necessity, is
hostile to the spirit and genius Of our in
stitutions, is unconstitutional and a legis-
lative usurpatiOn, and being j usurpa-
ton, "shOuld share the fate of other
usurpations."
The cour;, therefore, declares the said
law unconstitutional and void, and over
rules the defendants motion to dismiss
the petition.