The Morristown gazette. [volume] (Morristown, Tenn.) 1867-1920, 1876-05-24
THE Is PER CENT. PENALTY.
The Law Interpreted by Sena-
tor Hodges. Fras
MoRRIsrowN, May 19, 1876.a
le Editor Of the Morriatown Gazette

| ~ 40 "
To the Editor of the Morristown Gazette
Whether penalty" of II pei
cent. will attach to taxes of 1873
which remain unpaid June l, 1876
is question which / see is exciting
some interest. Let me say that
am aware that my opinion is worth
much less than that Of many gentle
men who take different view of the
question from that which / take
Nevertheless, it may not be amiss
for me to express the reasons which
it seems to me furnish a conclusive
negative answer to the question.
The question depends for its so.u-
ton, mainly, upon correct con-
struction of the Acts of 1878, Chap
ter 118.)
Sec. 42 of that act provides that
the tax books shall be made out and
placed in the hands of the tax COL
lector of the various counties by the
LIST day Of October.
Sec. 81 provides in effect that af-
ter the tax books have been in the
hands of collectors 4 months a pen.
atty of ten per cent. shall attach.
which shall be added and collected
after the expiration Of ninety days.
So that, seven months after the first
day of October penalty of 1O per
cent. attached; and by the express
letter of the law was charged up to
each tax payer, and became as
against him a debt just as the orig
inal taxi due the State and counties.
When would this happen? To my
mind, clearly on the first day of May.
1t will not do to say that the 10
per cent. attached 80 days after the
collector shall have visited the civil
district for the purpose of receiving
taxes. This construction if admis-
sible would place it in the power of
any collector to defeat the 10 per
cent. penalty entirely. He need not
advertise and attend in each civil
district. He is left to fix his own
time to do this |: and. consequently.
this clause Of the act is only direc-
tory to him. But upon the hypoth-
esis that the. date at which the pen
atty attaches is governed by the time
that he advertises and attends in a
given civil district, he may cause the
penalty to attach in one district and
not in another. The collector in one
county may cause it to attach, and
the collector in another county de-
feat the penalty as to his county en-
tirely. Such construction, besides
creating necessarily, unequal burd-
ems in different counties, and in diff
ferent districts of the same county,
is repugnant to the face of the law.
/ take it that the 10 per cent, penal
ty attached on the first day of May,
in every part of the State. And that
upon attaching it was and remained
part of the tax due from each tax
payer. -a
Sec. 61 provides that where taxes
remain unpaid on the first day of
June the collector shall add IL per
cent, etc. To what was this IL per
cent. added? / have seen or heard
but one construction given to sec.
81. It is conceded on all hands that
the effect of this section is to add2.
per cent. TO the taxes and penalty
remaining due June L. So that the
tax payer paying his taxes after
June 1, paid his original assess
ment with twelve per cent. added
and not with tooenty-ttOo per cent
added. . .4
But 10 Of this IL per cent. attach
ed by reason of the 50 and 81 sec
tions of the Act, and is no where il
the act relaitted. The Act of 1879
(chap. 1922 repeals these sections 5;
and 81 OF the act of 1878, and leave!
section 81 in force. But sec. g.
must have the same force and effec
as to the taxes of 1875 that it haC
in reference to the taxes OF 1874
That section added a penalty Of ttc'
per cent, to the taxes Of 1874. NJ
more. no less. It does no more thar
this at most for the taxes Of 1875
But sec. 8 of the Act of 1875 con
tsins the following:
Sections 50 and 81 and all other "
tto7ss of = 's chap. 11S n = = that ar
in conflict with this act = are re
pealed. +"
Now. sec. 81 is only a re-enact
ment, in effect, Of sections 50 an,
81, adding 2 per cent. to the penal
ty therein imposed. Query: Is no
section 81 OF the act of 1873 there
fore sin conflict with sec. 8 OF th
act of 1875? I think it is, and
therefore repealed. @ a 95
It seems to me that no other cor
clusion can be reached than this,
we admit that the law of 1873 in
posed no more than IL per cent. o
June I. aafii he98
1t is. owing to stringency in me
! ney matters, a question of impor
anee TO very many tax payers; an
since it was without doubt the dC
sire of the legislature to repeal a
f penalties, I hope to see a constru'
tion most favorable to the tax payer
given to the law In question.
sao ~ j. C. HoDGEs.
t A Scotchman had promised I