The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1884-01-26

very clear that the Constitution has not
vested this power In counties or corporate
bodies, and they have no such inherent
power a. adhercs In the sovereignty OF tue
State. They have no power OF taxation
cXcept the power be plainly aud unmis-
takably conferred" That Judge Dillon
says.
WHAT TAXES A MUNICIPALITY MAY LEVY.
It's a principle universally declared aud
admitted that municipal corporations eau
levy no taxes. general or special, upon the
Inhabitants or their property, unless the
power he plainly and Enthusiastically con.
ierred. II has indeed often been said that
i, must be specifically granted IN terms.
but all courts agree that the authority must
be given either IN express or by necessary
implication, and that 1t cannot be col
Iected by doubtful differences from other
powers, or powers relating to other sub
jects, nor deduced from any consideration
of convenience or advantages Dillon,
MINI. Corp, { COS, citing the town OF Dan
willie as. Pace. decided at the March term,
1852, and not reported. That the city oil
Lypchburg gives no such power, and says
no such mower could be given by the
state TO corporations, and that the charter
has superseded section 80, chapter -.
Staples. Judge, was Of opinion that
the Legislature had the power 10 confer
this mower upon the corporations, but was
Of opinion that In this case 1t had not been
conferred upon the city OF Lynchburg,
either by its charter or by section 80, chap
ter "a, OF the Code, aud concurred with
Judge Anderson in reversing the decree.
The power to levy any tax by corpora
ton cannot be inferred from legislative
authority unless such appears to be the
clear legislative intent.-1st Kan. 452, "a
Kan. 4J4.
The burden is upon the corporation to
show the grant ito lay the taxep by ex-
press words or necessary implication: FOR
otherwise it cannot be justified In the
exercise OF this high prerogatiye OF SOW
ereignty. Savannah rs. Hartness, s Ga.
Statutes authorizing The levying OF taxes
are strictly construed, and IL there Is much
doubt. that doubt exempts the citizen from
the burden.--Lot as. Ross. 80 Ala.
The law authorizing local assessments)
must he strictly followed as to all its sub
stantial requirements. -ScammOno as. Chr
cago, 40 Ill.
1t is undoubtedly true, as held by this
Court in the city of Richmond Us. Dam
ieI. that laws comforting the power OF tax
alton upon municipal corporation are to
he construed strictly, &c.-Joynes j.;
Railroad Co. Us. Alexandra, IL Graft.
II the objects or subjects Of taxation are
expressly designated, the right to tax for
other objects or subjects cannot be derived
from the general power 0hough expressly
contined) TO enact bylaws for the good
government OF the tOwn.-Asheyille rs
Means, judi, n. c. Law Il.
Upon an inspection OF the charter OF the
city OF Lynchburg Session Acts, 1S19@S0)
we End the subjects upon which the city Is
authorized to levy Il tax enumerated ut
great length, until they seem to cover
every conceivable subject hich might find
place in a taX-list. and yet we find no au-
thority fol the leyying OF this tax. Under
the authorities cited and plain rule of
we cannot conclude other
wise than that, for reasons deemed wise,
the Legislature intended to withhold this
power; and we are of opinion that the de-
cision of the learned Judge of the Circuit
Court, that This power was 10 be found in
section 80 OF chapter 81, is not sustained
by the terms:)i that section-this is not a
us we have seen.
In the light of the authorities and upon
'eason the concluding sentence cannot be
10 apply to other subjects OF
aXatiOn than such as are assessed annually
With State taxes. The provision is gen.
,ral, and was intended to apply to the gen.
eral subjects Of taxation, such as are pro-
iided for taxes generally, and ought not to
be extended TO include a special power to
eyy this special tax unless the authority
be expressly given by law. And we cannot
but believe that the Legislature would
ever in its wisdom grant this power with
pit placing some limit upon this grant OF
power.
We are unanimously Of opinion that the
Circuit Court erred in its decree appealed
rom, and the said decree must be reversed
md annulled.
Opinion OF Judge Lacy.