The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1881-11-16
8nhuloaI 4ispattll.
wrpSEspAY. NOVEMBER IS, 1881
NJ MasseY,s CoIlectors.

certificate issued by Mr. pS'h"'''"' -
,h,s city. we are not willing even TO seem
20 do Injustice TO the judge, and We utterly
d,sclaim any purpose TO be unkind. We
took It for granted, from reading his opin'
so,, IN Inc cese, that he himself attached nc
sreclsl importance to It and had reached
his conclusions in q hurry. When we re-
sall the fact that he was compelled to dc
eide Mt once, without previous nouce,
whether BEyERIDGE's receipts entitled
their holders TO votes or not, we cannot nu'
feel surprise that anybody should take eA'
oep,ion 10 Whist we said on that point.
Mr.. MAssEY's apologists speak OF the law
authorizing the Auditor to appoint q cor
hector in any county or corporation 10 cor
lect "arrcars Of taxes" as II that law au'
thorized the Auditor to appoint person N
esch county or corporation 20 collect delin'
ouent capitation-taxcs. But th's Is ms
take. The phrase "arrears OF taxes " does
not include delinquent capitation-taxes---
the taxes which we say BEyERIDGE has no
right to collect. II is alsoa mistake 10 sup
nose tina. the word collector" as employco
in the twcnty-ninth section OF the law VIC
are discussing, was used as synonymous
with The word "coilector" as used IN the
thirty-fourth section. The word "eollec'
tor l. used in its generic sense in the one
section and in strictly technical sense IN
the ether.
First as to the technical sense. IL the
reader will examine the Code OF 1860 he viii
find the same law. 1t is the same law, we
say, aud in the same words, as a general
rule; but the part Of il now under consld'
Grafton reads as follows:
al copy thereof shall be placed by the
Auditor in the hands OF any Shefty
or collector Of any county or corporation
for collection"
Here we have the meaning OF the word
"collector., The law said in 1860 that the
sheriff Of any county or the collector Of
any corporation should collect these delin-
quent taxes. The word collector" in
the existing Law must necessarily have the
same meaning. That meaning is plain. In
1860 shcrias collected the States revenues
but each corporation pretty, or town. had
also collector, so called in the charter
and in the laws. Therefore the law pro-
vided that n copy Of the lists in question
should be placed in the hands OF either the
sheriff or the city collector.
We quote from the 29th section that part
of IL which shows what sort Of collector is
meant. It's words are as they follow:
"a certified copy OF the first and third
lists heretofore returned shall be placed by
the Auditor in the hands 0;
any sheriff, sergeant, constable, or collec-
tor for collection, the same TO be accounted
for within one year thereafter; said OFFl-
GER to have the same power Of distress as
trCasurers, and shall account for the same
I'm like manner; and he and has Streties
shall be subject to all such remedies as are
given the Commonwealth against treasurers
for failure to pay"
Now, any person not being an "oticer,"
and not having "SuretieS" at the time OF
his appointment by Mr.. MASSEY, would be
a irespasser il he undertook to exercise the
"power OF Distress" The law mentions
none but officers already in Office and hay-
ing sureties already bound for them; but
Mr.. MASSEY processes to think that he can
appoint person TO perform this duty and
give him the "power OF distress" by
simply calling such person "collector."
Such is not the meaning OF the law. II
means that Mr.. MASSEY may appoint
sheriff already in Office, or sergeant
already in Office, or constable already in
Office, or a collector already in Office: but
whoever is appointed must be an officer,
and must have sureties. II will be seen
that the collector" provided for is moi
required TO give surety. Why not? Be
cause it is assumed by the law that he
Already has sureties. That whoever is ap-
pointed must be an officer already, seems
too plain for argument. The City Col.
lector Of Richmond and other such col
lectors, 80 called by law, were meant to be
described by the word collector" which
Mr.. MASSEY has stretched so as to cover
his usurpations. We, therefore, deny thai
the law in terms gives the Auditor the
power Of appointing BEvEmDGE, or any
body else not an officer, to collect delin
quent capitatlon-taxes.
The question is so clearly discussed il
the following extracts from the communi
cation Of a frst-class lawyer Of this city
that we reproduce them again for the ben
eft oil all whom they may concern. Ill
says:
Section 30 imperatiyely commands tha
certified copy Of the delinquent capita
ton and pcrsonal-property taxes "shall b.
placed by the Auditor of Public Accounts
within sixty days after receiving the orIgi
nails, or as soon thereafter. rs practicable
in the hands of any sheriff, sergeant, con
5 stable, or collector, for collection, the same
to be accounted for within one year there
after; but in no case shall sucl
delinquent lists be placed for collection il
the hands OF any officer whe has returned
the sanle.'
The use OF the word "collector" in tn
foregoing extract Is the only thing that cal
give even the pretenee OF color Of authorit,
to the conduct of Mr.. Massey in appoint
ing persons not already officers to collcc
those taxes. And upon reading the Who'll
statute, it Is manifest that the collector
referred 70 In the 29th section is not tn
collector referred TO in section 80.
The one is an officer already in existenc
by election or appointment, whose suretie
on bonds already executed and approved
by the courts are by the net made subiec
70 all such remedies as are given agains
Treasures; the ether is n person who ma
or may not be appointed, at the pleasure O
the Auditor.
The oae is an officer bound by law to &C
count for the "delinQuent taxes" ,oithi
one year after receiving the list; the othe
is person 10 whom the Auditor shall al
to,c q reasonable time, one year or i've year