Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1886-12-09
The Public Debt.

10 Samuel d. Ddrics, esq, Richmond, Ia:
DEAR SRI have read in the Alexan-
dria GAZETTE, of the 4sh inst, your reply
to MI. J. X. NJ. Norton, who in the same pa
per discussed the question, Whose prop.
erty as the rendered coupon"?
II seems to me you consider (perhaps
that was your purpcse,) but one of the three
propositions argued by Mr.. Norton, and,
that is, 1.-THE class OF cases" in which, the
taxpayer has rendered his coupon" the
tender been refused, levy upon his property
made ant sale under this y-thereufte?,
suit brought against the treasurer, in a Fed.
eral Court, his Office ignored, and verdict for
damages by a jury, equal in amount to the
Lax collected and consequential damages
with Judgment thereon.
know You are sincere in your views,
therefore, to test your ''logic," and at the
same time present the other side Of this
question, n most important one, and far.
reaching in lis consequences TO the citizen
and the Commonwealth, let me cite a real
case, "Baf7y IS. EdmondS," U. S. Supreme
Court. n. Z. Barry, of Fauquier county ten
uered TO Il q. Edmonds, the county treasur-
er, coupons" in payment of taxes, due TO
inc commonwealth of Virginia. Ednonds
agreed to take the coupons "ror
veriiication and Identification" Mr..
Barry declined. Edmonds as treasurer.
executed the law of his Stale and obeved
the order Of the Auditor, levied fer the tax,
sold the property and paid the proceeds into
The treasury of the State. Barry sued Ed.
mcnds for tresspass in the federal court, re.
covered the tax and was paid back, tax and
damages. Edmunds's only. business connec
ton, mark you, with Barry, was in his OH.
ctal capacity Us treasurer; he did nothing, as
an indlriduai; in his every act, he ,cas Eau.
q"ier treasurer, duly elected by her quail.
lied voters and in the discharge Of the duties
imposed upon him, by the constitution and
the laws of Virginia True, the recovery
IN the federal court was upon so.called
personal judgment, but this is simply leqal
.fctt"n on the order of the ancient pleadings
and after the manner of those noted MYTHS
| "John Doc' and "Richard Roc" You know
| know, Mr.. Barry knows, that the money
he received in discharge of his Judgment
came out of Tirginia's treasury, and
was paid TO him by Virginia. Hence
| Virginia has returned TO Mr.. Barry
his tax, and Mr.. Barry is in possession o.
the coupons rendered. And, therefore, iu
fact, Mr.. Barry has paid no tao. He stands
to-day just where be did when he made
'his tender" He enjoys his home aud i,
protected in his property by the Common.
wealth, but is exempt" if your views be
right, and belongs to q priri!cged class o.
tar payers. He has paid his tax, you say
but holds the thing with which the tax was
paid, in his own pocket. Verify, Mr. Barry
has found out how to cat his cake, and keen
Il, too. AS | view this question in law and
in equity, certainly "in The forum of ones
conscience" the rendered coupons in Mr.
Barry's possession belong to J'rginia. i
not, why not? Your argument from be
ginning to end is based upon "a fallacy"-
the vice in il. Edmonds and the Common.
wealth are one and the same entity" ant,
you cannot, with proper regard for truth
and fact, separate them. Very respectfully
r. TAYLOR SC0Tr.
Warrenton, Va, Dec. Z, 1856.