Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1874-01-23
| From the Washington Republican. |


,ho G.neraI Government, to be added to The
District of Columbia, has been discussed pro
and con bv those Interested. Decmlng the
matter of sufficient Importance TO be put to
leral test, Mr.. r. a. Phillips, citizen and
tax naver of the county, concluded that ne
would bring the subject before the courts TOR
their decision With this end in view, on the
navment of his taxes he filed written protest,
and now, by his attorney, Westel Wllioughpy,
brings suit to recover the same. The question.
of course, turns upon the constltulopallty Ut
the act Of July 9, 1916, retrUcedlDg Alexandra
county and city to Virginia
The following are the papers in the case:
PROTEST AGAINST PAYMENT.
To Charles w. Payne: Take notice that in
delivering to you the sum of Sl65. Is, which
YOU herewith receive from me as taxes claimed
to be due from me by virtue of assessments
claimed 10 have been made under the laws OF
VIRGINIA upon property owned by me in Alex
andria county, and to be payable to you as col
lector of the township of Washington, 10 said
county, elected under the laws OF Virginia, 1
do So under protest, claiming and insisting that
the said county, which is my residence and IN
| which nv property upon which the alleged as
scssmcnts are made, is in the District vi Co.
lumbia and not within the jurisdiction or con-
| troll of the State of Virginia, and that you are
| not a legal officer of the said county aud have
no authority to demand or receive moneys as
such officer or otherwise, and that any and al!
laws and acts .purporting to place the SAID
county of Alexandria under the jurisdiction
and control of the State Of Virginia or OF It's
laws are contrary to the Constitution of the
United States, and arc wholly unaut horned,
illegal and void. do not deliver this money
to YOU voluntarily but under compulslon and
TO avoid a seizure and sale and sacrifice OF my
property to enforce the collection thereof,
which the law under which you claim to act in
terms REQUIRES Of you in case of refusal on my
part, in which you will be sustained by power
which | am unable to resist, but which claim
10 be wholly unlawful. | hereby give you no.
tice that | do not waive any of my rights as a
citizen of the District of Columbia, but shall
immediately commence suit ID court vi com
pctcnt jurisdiction for the recovery Of the
mouey herewith received by you, aud you are
hereby notified and warned not to pay over the
said money to any officer of the State OF Fr-
giuia nor to any person other than myself.
January 81, 1874. RoBT A. PHILLIPS.
TIE DECLARATION IN THE CASE.
In the Supreme Court Of the District of Co.
lumbia, the - day of January, 1874. Robt.
A. Phillips VS.. Charles W. Payne At law
No. -.
The plaintiff sues the defendant for money
received by the defendant for The use OF the
plaintiff, TO wit, the sum OF Sl65 Is.
For further cause OF action the plaintiff
sues the defendant for that; whereas the ter
ritory known as the county Of Alexandria, in
pursuance of the Constitution of the United
States, by an act Of the General Assembly OF
the State of Virginia, Of December 3, 1889,
was coded to the United States, together with
| all the rights and jurisdiction thcrewith; and
Whereas as authorized by the Constitution Of
the United States, an act Of Congress was
passed accepting such cesson; aud whereas
| said county, together with the county OF WASH
| ington, which had been coded to the United
States by the State OF Maryland, was by Con
grcss set apart as the seat OF Government OF
the United States, embracing territory of ten
miles square, which was ordained, orga-
nizad aud established as the District Of Co
lumbia, over which the Constitution Of the
| United States requires that Congress shall
exercise exclusive legislation in all cases
| whatsoever and whereas, subsequently to
wit, on the 9th day of July, 1916, in viola
ton of the Constitution of the United States
and without any legal authority, Congress pass
ed an act, purporting to authorize 4 vote to be
taken by the people Of said County, to determine
whether the said county should be retroceded
to the State Of Virginia, and declaring that IN
case majority of the votes Of said people were
cast in favor of such retroccsslon, the said
county should be retroceded and forever rclln
uuished in full and absolute right and jurlsdlc-
ton; and whereas majority OF said votes we're
cast 10 favor of such retroct sslon, upon which,
and without further authority or action OF Con-
gress, the General Assembly Of the State of
Virginia passed an act declaring that the said
county of Alexandria was thereby reannexed to
the State of Virginia, and constituted portion
thereof; and whereas, siuce the said act Of 1916
the said State of Virginia has assumed to ex-
ercise jurisdiction aud control of said county,
and has assumed to authorize the election Of
officers for said county, among which is the Of
fee known as the collector for the township of
Washington, in the said county, and un
der such pretended authority the said de-
PENDANT was elected such collector, and
now assumes to exercise the duties
thereof as such collector; and whereas said
State has also assumed to inforce within the
said county its laws for the assessment and col
lection OF taxes upon persons residing therein,
and upon property therein situated; and where
as the said defendant, claiming to be such col
lector, and claiming that an assessment had
been made, under the laws of Virginia, upon
the property of this plaintiff, who resides in
said county, and who is the owner Of large and
valuable real estate and other property therein,
which is the property upon which such assess.
ment is claimed to have been made, aud that
there was payable to him as such collector from
this plaintiff upon such assessment the sum OF
sl65 Is, demanded the payment thereof; and
whereas, iu case OF refusal, the said defendant,
being SO directed by the said pretended laws of
the State of Virginia, would have levied upon
the property of this plaintiff and sold the same
to satisfy such claim, and iu this would have
been supported by the power Of the State Of
Virginia, which this plaintiff could not resist;
and whereas this plaintiff, in order to prevent
such sacrifice of his property thus threatened
to be made, delivered the said sum of. money
to said defendant on the Dist day Of January,
1874, under protest, and motif Tying said defend
ant at the time that he regarded the exaction Of
such money as illegal and wholly unartho 3D.