The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1884-06-30

the State 20 unta1ed, and the revenues oil
the State be diminished much below the
tstimate Of the Auditor, and the machin.
cry Of the Government be clogged, or |,
may be entirely stopped. ~. Ms. M
II ouch yiew be correct, why did the
Legislature provide Section s, Chapter IL,
Acts 1851 that the Auditor should ssnd
printed forms Tor the lists Of taTaJle alljects
and give the assessors inst, uctious M 10
their dutieB? Because It wau clear to the
Legislative mind, that in no other way
could the. equality and uniformity OF taxa.
tion required by the Constitution be SO.
cured. Taxation could not be tq,lal and
Uniform II eIghty.three assessors could con.
Btrue the law and each Tor himself decide
what property was taxable and what ex.
empt. ;f;5;g3s9 B. tt@t, s5'Er "a
Can ministerial officer refuse to obey
the instructions Of his superior, and then
excuse himself for disobedience on the
ground that his instructions were illegal 2
He cannot Waldron vs. Lee, + Pick, 500;
People vs.. Collins, 7 Johns, $40; Smyth
We. Ti:comb, 81 Me-, 27S; People vs.. salo.
mon, 81 ILL.,, 80. sG'.G = q s7F
In the last cited case the respondent had
disobeyed an act Of the Legislature on ths
ground that 1t was Unconstitutional.
H. TIE dovKRSoR's JURISDICTION.
And 1t Is said that in the case before US
is an act Of the Legislature, which 1t was
the duty Of respondent to obey.
We are lfee to admit that II there had
been no decislon Of what the law wss, by
an authority, having the right 10 decide the
question, 1t would clearly have been the
duty Of the assssaor to have obeyed the re.
quiremonts Of Section 43. But tho Cover.
nor decided that the construction placed
by the court on eectinn |, OF article s, Of
the Constitution Of 1868, In Railway o.
vs.. Miller, 10 W. W., 4S0, was practically a
construction Of section /, ,of Article 10, OF
the present Constitution, the effect Of
which he decided was to declare unconsti.
tutionat 50 much oil section 43, OF chapter
Il, as exempted from taxation agricultural
products. manufactured articles, &c. Did
he have jurisdiction to decide this question,
and the right 10 resort 10 the action no did
to have the exempted property taxed2
We maintain II he had jurisdiction TO
determine this question, then 1t was the
duty Of the assessors to take his decision in
the matter, as the law, and to obey, with.
out question, the instructions OF the Audi.
tor based on that decision. No one will
question the principle that all inferior off.
GERS Of courts, in all cases where the court
has jurisdiction, are bound to obey the
order or mandate OF the court, and il they
refuse to obey, are panished. |'srn'
II the Legislature, within its Jurisdiction,
orders thing to be dono by the Sergeant.
alarms Of either house, The thing mus.
without question be performed, or the in.
ferior officer will be punished TOR disobedi.
ence. rNfE gpn5 b.
BY the Constitution, Sec. !, Art. v, it il
provided: 1.-THE Legislative, Executive aud
Judicial departments shall be separate and
distinct" etc. ET
The departments Of the government.
must be kept separate and distinct, and
each in ita legitimate sphere mus! be pro.
tected, otherwise the government fails.
Slack vs. Jacob s, W. Va, GGl. The Leg.
islatiye department has certain powers, the
exercise OF which can in no respect be re-
viewed by either Of the others. The same
is true OF the Executive and Judicial Ds.
partmepte.