The comet. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1877-1882, 1881-01-08
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.
OCTOBER TERM. 1850.
II. +. BECK, Sheriff and Tax Collector, !
VS.. :

OCTOBER TERM. 1850.
II. +. BECK, Sheriff and Tax Collector,
VS..
CHARLES B. ALLEN.
This is the case in which the unanimous opinion
Of the Court was published in Tia" last issue OF TN
CosEr. The opinion below is published in full
but Is the opinion oi only a majority OF the Court
There Is Il concuning and dissenting opinion
which will be published next week.
II is claimed by the appellant that rs iy,
of the twenty-five mills were for bridge
taxes that the whole levy should be sus
taiHed aud that the injunction should hav,
been wholly dissolved. This raises the
questions; whether the restriction in the
Act in relation to the public revenue, ap.
proved March 6 1880 can be c0nstitutiOnally
applied TO special ieyies for bridge taxes 7
That the legislature intended to embrace
these leyies within the restriction Sc ems
very clear from the language of the Act,
which declares that 'bOards of supervisors
are hereby prohibited from lcyying taxes
which added to the State tax will exceed
Twelve Dollars aud Fifty cents on each
Thousand Dollars of taxable property.
Provided, that TO meet any outstanding in
dcbtedness the amount herein provided may
exceed but in no case shall the total tax
exceed fifteen dollars ON each Thousand
Dollars worth of property"
The Statute then contains two further
allowing the board of SUI
peryisOrs in nine named counties to levy
taxes. which including the amount OF the
State tax shall amount to twenty one dol
lars on the thousand and the other eXclud-
ing from the operation of the restriction
taxes levied TO pay bonds issued in and of
the Natchez ane jackson Railroad Co.
This language is plain and unmistakable.
II is urged on the part of tie appellant that
this provision Is unconstitutional. in as
sIIming To limit the power of the board of
Supervisors 10 determine upon the sulli-
cheney Of the amount to be raised for the
erection and repairs of court houses, iailS
and bridges and other necessary cOnyen-
fences for the people of the county. II IL
insisted that III sections of Art. MI, of
c0nlers on the board of SUI
pcryisOrs the unrestricted right To raise,
by special tax, whatever sums, however
large, they may deem necessary for these
purposes and that the general supervisory
and controlling power Of the legislature ac-
To exist as to all other matters
Of county taxation is included by the terms
of the section which Is as follows: "No
county shall be denied the right to raise by
special tax, money sufficient TO pay for the
and the repairing of court houses,
ails. bridges and other necessary conyen-
ences for the people of the county, and
money thus raised shall never be appro-
priated to any other purpose. Provided the
lax thus levied shall be certain per cent
on all tax levied by the state
We cannot give our assent to this con-
strIctiOn and as there are two eases in this
court from which we are compelled to dis
sent il is proper that we state grounds upon
which we rest our decision. IL is cardi-
nal rule Of construction of constitutions
and statutes to ascertain the intention of
he trainers of the instruments, and this
will be that which the natural
'igniication of the words employed taken
N their ordinary sense indicate II the
tense be plain aud involve no absurdity
md no contradiction in different parts of
he constitution or statute. Tested by this
'ule the section under consideration il II
direction to the legislature not to deny to
he counties the right toleyy by special tax
sufficient amount for the purposes men,
ioned in it. Now, "deny" means, to with
iold, to refuse 10 grant tsec Mebster's
There can be no Withholding, except by
power which may retain or keep back,
lOr a refusal to grant except where the
hing refused may be granted. Hence the
anglage employed refers to right which
: thereafter TO he granted aud does not of
Is own force operate rs Nesting oi power,
The language is 'n0 county shall be denied
he right to raise etc" which is exactly
equivalent TO the phrase, "the right to
aise etc. shall not be withheld from,
II refused TO be granted 10 any county"
man cannot, properly, be said to with
lold, that which he does not possess, nor
o refuse a grant of that which already be-
ongs TO the grantee. The words used
aiken in their ordinary and popular sig
lilicatiOn imply direction TO depart
nent having the power to grant and 10
aud are a limitation upon this
,ower. This does not imply destruction
f all power over the subject in the de.
,artment which but for this section would
,ossess IL. II that had been the intent the
appropriate language would have been TO
,rohibit all "Interference" with the right
o levy. The section must therefore be
onsidered as directed TO the legislature
that body not to withhold from
he counties the right to levy sufficient
mount for the purposes mentioned. The
legislature may regulate and restrict this
light if only a sufliciency Of taxation for
he purposes mentioned, be granted.
The legislature must necessarily be the
l,lge of what is sufficient. The right TO
Ak is TO be granted by the legislature,
hat body IL commanded not TO refuse 10
lake the grant. The grant Is TO be OF a
amount and dunquestionably the
power must judge OF the sufhelen-
Y, unless some other tribunal Is invested
" the constitution with supervisory
over over the legislature on the subject
nd possesses the right TO hN absolutely IN
Is discretion what sum shall be granted
\ The legislature. This power is not
iaimed to be vested in any tribunal eN-
rpt the board Of supervisors. IL vested
4 the board, IL must be by this clause OF
le constitution or in some other part
hereof. IL j. not among the powers
ranted them by section 20. Art. VI, which
numerates the powers aud jurisdiction
ranted to the boards nor any other clause.
L. not granted TO the supervisors by the
lause In question. for that body L. not
lentioned in Il, although especially named
every other clause in the constitution
lcludng section ~ Of this same Article, In
hitch power Is granted to them. More
yer IL the board IL to judge Of the sufficien-
y Of the amount, then they have in opposi-
on to the plain words Of the constitution,
he legislature, TO levy n special tax for the
urposes named 20 any extent they may
eem sufficient. IL this had been the In
sntiOn Of the trainers Of the constitution
hey have employed language singularly
to express IL. The rule that
squires us to take words used IN the con-
.ituti0n. i'm their ordinary aud popular
,usc. presumes, that the trainers OF the
DnstitutiOn knew how to express their
lcas in appropriate language.
In all other parts Of the instrument
here power is granted, the grant IL made
, plain aud proper language. Power Is
vested A. in Art. IL. Sec !. and in Art.
See. 1. and Art. 6. see, 1, or as u II ex-
ressed in Sec. -, Art XII, the county |
oards shall have power to etc" To ar
We at the construction which we have re- /
,cted we must disregard the plain mean |
IL Of the words taken In their ordinary
gui6catiOn and we must also suppose that |
,e convention in this clause above,
.ieeted the ordinary constitutional
nguage employed by itself in maxi
,e grants Of power, and resorted 70
which Of Itself negatives
~ idea intended 20 be conveyed We are
OF authorized 10 indulge In such a suppo-
ton. We must follow the language |
, used. and give u Its proper signihcstion.
heir i a plain difference between the de- /
Ial Of a power and a just regulation Of
: exercise. A prohibition against the de- I
iaI Of a right cannot fairly be construed 1
10 an exelusisn of an otherwise acknOwl- |
ired mower Of control and supervision. A /
gbt nav be regulated and limited, even |
1paired' without being absolutely denied. I
~ correctness Of this view Il made clear |
' several other considerations, some Of
hieh we viii notice.
From the earliest periods in England and |
this country. the taxing power has been |
-.