Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1884-03-03
EXEMPTION FROM TAXATION.

Petersburg Benevolent Mechanic Associa,
ton. The question was whether the real
estate of the Association is subject 10 tax
alton. No TAX on its property is assessed
By the State bus in 1880 it was assessed for
taxation by the city Of Petersburg, and the
collection OF the tax was enjolned by the
Corporation Court OF that city. The prop
erty in question IS il certain lot in Peters
burg, upon which is d building, one-third
OF which is used by the Association and
the other two-thirds is rented out and the
proceeds applied exclusively to the pur-
poses of the Association. The Association
claimed the right of exemption under an
act Of the Legislature approved April =,
! 1877, which provides that real estate owned
by Masonic, Odd Fellows, and other like
| benevolent associations, when the proceeds
arising from said properly are devoted cx~
clusivciy to charitable or school purposes,
shall be.exempt from taxation. The claim
to exemption was resisted by the city on
three grounds: l. Because the Legislature
has no power, under the Constitution, TO
exempt property from taxation which Is
no. itself used BY the Association although
| the proceeds derived from its use are ap-
piled 10 the purposes of the Association, >.
!
property are not applied TO charitable pur-
! poses; aud 3. Because the statute relied on
| does not exempt property which is used for
| private purposes or for profit, no matter TO
what purposes the proceeds are applied.
| Judge Lewis delivered the unanimous
| opinion Of the court. He said
The Constitution, Article X, section 3,
empowers the Legislature 10 exempt all
| property from taxation which sis used eN-
| clusively for State, county, municipal, be-
nevcient charitable, educational. and rci-
| sious PURPOSES IL Is coniended that eX-
| cmption from taxation being il dcrogation
OF common right. this provision OF the Con-
| stitutou must be strictly construed. 1t is
certainly true that public grants, Of which
exemption from taxation is one, are always
! 10 be strictly construed. Liability TO taxa
| lion is the rule, exemption tic exception,
and before such exemption can De admitted
the intent OF the Legislature TO confer it
must be clear beyond & reasonable doubt
Miuot Ts. The Railroad Company, IS Wall,
20G. And hence it has been often held where
exemption from taxation is granted BY sta
| tute, in respect to property used Tor partlc-
ular purposes, that The exemption ceases
when the property is used for different pur-
poses, although the proceeds are devoted to
the purpose which tho Legislature had in
view. ST. Mary's College VS.. Grove, trea-
surer. 10 Kan. II2 CHM Col. vs.. the State,
- Ohio, 10: Pierce vs.. tie inhabitants Of
Cambridge, Cush., Gl1 State vs. RcsS, t
| Zab., l34, and mauy other cases cited by
the appellants counsel. Bu; this rule in
regard io the judicial construction Of statu'
tory grants has 10 application to The pre-
sent case. Except "hcrc limited by the
Constitution the power OF Inc Legislature
over al subjects OF general legislation is alb
solute. And 50 the power Of taxation, as well
AS the power Of exemption, being essential
elements OF sovereignty, arc coniiGcd to the
legislature Every statute, the object and
provisions of which are within the acknowl-
edged po94crs Of legislation, Is presumed to
be constitutional until the contrary is clear
ly demonstrated. Whether the effect of the
constitutional provision quoted, when fairly
construed, Is Il limitation on the power Of
the Legislature III respect TO the exemption
Of property from taxation, or whether its
power over Ire subject is unlimited, is was
| held b. two OF the judges in Williamson VS..
the Auditor (33 Graft, 237l and as TO which
| Judge BufliS. who concurred ~ the Juds-
ment, expressed no opinion, is Il question
which need not be decided in the present
case. 1t is sufficient to say that we enter
tain no doubt that the grant Of power 10
exempt all property used for the purposes
enumerated carries with il the power to cy-
empt such property when its proceeds are
devoted exclusively 10 any Of those purposes
and that the act iii question is constitutions
III and valid.
But the appellant denies that the proceeds
are applied TO charitable purposes. \ char
liable use, it is contended, must be Il public
use within the meaning of the statute. The
same rule of construction contended ior
woulC! exclude from the benefit of the stat
ute Masonic, Odd Fellows and other like
associations, whose revenues are not applied
to public purposes, and whose right of exemp-
ton is uuquestioned. The authorities relied
on By the counsel for the appeant are cases arising
under the statue Of the 43d oc Elizabeth relating
to trusts for charitable use, similar statutes
not in force in this State. and have no bearing on
the present case. We think the term Charitable
is used in the act not in restricted but rather in
its enlarged sense Of benevolent, which is one OF
its definitions given by the lcXlcographcrs, ana
that in this view the funds OF the Association are
used for charitable purposes The objects OF the
Association, which was incorporated by the Leg
islature in 1926 are set forth in its constitution
and bylaws and in the preamble thereto, which
declares that in instituting society OF mechanics
charity should be the principal but not the only
object lis revenues, rs the testimony shows, are
wholly applied TO the payment OF its current ex'
penses the assistance OF its INDECENT members
and the families Of such ofthem as may have died
in needy circumstances.
We cannot doubt that tho exemption conferred
bv the statute extends to the present case. BY
the act approved March TO- 1871 tActs 1S14-75
page 219] it was provided that no lot or building
partially or wholly used for any private purpose
or profit should be exempt from taxation. But
by the act now in force (acts 1oI6-'1 =, pages
2O2-3) il is provided that where part OF tht
proceeds derived from the property applied tc
charitable or school purposes the property to thai
extent shall be exempt. In this case the whole
proceeds arc devoted to the purposes OF the Asso
ciation or in other words to charitable purposes
and hence the property is exempt from taxation
The decree OF the Corporation Court IS affirmed.
NAVY BEANS for sale at
| IN fobS I G MILRUPS'S