The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1883-03-29
4 TWO DOLLARS PER ANNUM
NO. so
The Question OF the Validity of the
Marured Coupons to be Tested,

The question OF the validity of the ma
tured coupons of Virginia consols and
10 40s in paying State taxes is about to be
practically tested in view OF the fact that
the United States Supreme Court, in its
late decision on the coupon killer case, re-
asserted the opinion that the State is bound
to take the coupons in payment of taxes
and State dues.
The test is in manner different from any
proceedings heretofore taken or outlined,
and is the result of a correspondence be-
tween Mr.. J. s, Lennon, of the Baltimore
bar, and gentleman of position in Vir-
ginia, who is large taxpayer As a first
step IN the matter the Virginian has ten
dered the amount of the coupons necessary
to cover his taxes, which have been refused
and he therefore has the coupons identified
and kept subject to the order of the collee-
tor, and he snow awaits the onset"
The following sketch of the proceedings
and the expected result, under the previous
decisions of the Supreme Court, is taken
in extract from the correspondence NEIL
toned. 1.-THE citizen is debtor to his State
Just as he may be debtor to any other citi-
zen and a legal tender Of the amount due
is all the law requires of him; and as on
the one side he cannot compel his creditor
70 accept payment, the creditor cannot. on
the other. put him to airy legal COSTS by
suing him. The debtor can bring the
money rendered into court, show the tender
and throw all costs upon the collector.
1.-THE taxpayers protection arises from
the fact that no sale or seizure of his prop
erty can be lawfully made or justified for
the non-payment of taxes, the amount
whereof ne. has already rendered in gold or
its NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS..
mo purchaser at such unlawful sale can
acquire title to any property. real or per-
sonal, which would protect his possession
against the outraged taxpayer and no State
Official could make such seizure or sale
without exposing himself to damages.
I'm my opinion, the result of the first con-
test will settle the debt question etfectually
IN manner following:
'SuppO;e Smith, in the payment of taxes,
tenders 81, 900 in coupons, and the collector.
after refusing to accept same, seiZes and
sells Smiths cattle for the $1,000 to Jones,
who takes possession and pays the purchase
money. Smith thereupOn gives bond and
replevies his cattle, leaving Jones without
his money, which has been applied to
Smiths taxes, as well as without the cat
tie. In self-defense Jones must sue Smith
on the bond, and the validity of the seizure
and sale is so brought before court and car
ried ultimately to Washington, where the
supreme Court, having before it the one
simple question of Smiths right to pay his
taxes in coupons, affirms the validity of the
tender and sets aside the sale, having al
ready said that. the right to pay in coupons
is inviolable and no longer open in that
COURT
"Such decision, being based on the affirm
.tlve right will render useless both the pre-
tent and all futura tcounOn-killprS' which
Ieek to take away the remedy and will de-
troy the power of collecting any taxes until
sfter provision is made for all coupons"