The tribune. [volume] (Beaufort, S.C.) 1874-1876, 1875-05-19
TAX TITLES

tf1ct Court In the matter of titles to prop
erty acquired at Direct tax sales duri no
The war and which was argued last week
III Charloscn, can scarcely be regarded as
decision fcr,s hadowing a decree as to
their validity by the Suprtme Court be.
fore whom an appeal has been taken.
The court declined taking exception to
alleged irregularities in the manner and
form of conducting the sales or of hold.
ing jurisdiction over the nice questions
Involving the corstitutionality of the acts
authorizing them. An appeal was taken
trom the decision rendered, which was a
ccree simply upon the merits of the facts
AID evidence and Lot upon the law, and
1Icrcforc cannot be regarded either as Fl I.
MI or satisfactory ,1'
The questions in the issue of
these cases are of vital importance to the
whole section of the Sea Island Coast that
fell into. the hands of the Governm ent
during the war. The whole amount of
tax levied upon the State of So. Carroll.
"a as her quota of the war. tax by the
Ienl. Government was realized by the
sale of these properties upon the coast,
which, from their exposure, fell prey to
this partial legislation and upon those
who In their absence, were powerless to
restrain. f - .i,y-
Commissioners were sent down to
survey and lay off the abandoned proper
lies and they were disposed of by the Gov
,rnmeht agents under authority of the
several acts passed from time to time, and
the tax thus raised was placed to the
credit OF the whole State by whom the
quota was said to be due. At the ter
lniDntlOu of fbo ,yor kho
ants who had been ordered from their
homes by the Confederate Government
returned to find them held and occupled
by Others and themselves homeless, amid
thelr former possessions and which had
been alieniated during their enforced
absence. For fourteen years they have not
until now eyen had an appeal from, the
action of the Tax Commissioners and
their properties have been held by
purchasers under the Government tax sale.
10 our minds it matters not what NAV
be the decision arrived at, either upon
the facts or upon the law, there can be
but one action of the Government that
will give stability to the titles acquired
under the operations of the Direct tax
acts, or that win insure a we'll founded
confidence In their validity. We do not
see now it were possible forrtbe Govern.
ment to retroyerse its action so far as the
present holders are concerned, and an in
demnltcation of the former owners IN
consle, ration of their quit claims would
setmto be the only method of adjust
ment feaslole, rs 1t might be the only
one even partially just and equitable.
70 admit nothing of our grave doubts
ofthe permanency of our modern society.
the chain of titl,s thus arbi .rarily broken
hnd unestabiished must always operate
preludlclally to the present holders OF
property thus acquired and render their
tenure to- say The least unsatisfactory
2 AID precaricus, whetber with or without
reasonable pretext. The questions ir-
foiNea are too intri cate and the funda-
Mehtai principles of the laws of succession
nre 1co deeply laid fer US in the limits Of
an article like this to discuss, We have
neYr doubted the constit utiopality or
authcrlty OF the acts levying the tax but
the requirement Of all the r,qusitions to
cEGpic them to. withstand legal scrutiny
is another qusstion. There are certain
We'll dcfntdt and imrnutable principles
cl laws that 10 simple fiat can contro
sAene or destroy and although rights and
lniiiinltIcs Impy rest III abey aBco there ia
9 10 such thing as annihilating the basis up
ON winch the whole fabric of law and
order aIe-f er- ctcd. We have always re-
garded aHy aId all property ACQUIRED
under tax suies as lia5ie to be jeopardized
by the manifest 1errcy of commission or
0mls ! IN fnltlmcnt of conditions of
,ieSaiity. Cntil q satisfactory and reason
s be adJustment is eff cid 'as great
M injustioe is being done
fheT present holders. Who tdoubtlass