Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1888-03-18
COUPON DECISION.
ANOTHER INTERESTING CASE BEFORE
JUDGE HANCOCK.
Tho Rights and Duties Of Persons Who Ten
der Coupobs-1hs Question Of Costs
Considered.
lcorrspondoncs Of thc Richmond Dispatch.l


lCorrespvndence Of ihc Richmond Dispatch.l
PETERSBURG, VA, March Il, 1893.
Tho Circuit Court Of Petersburg has been IN
session for nearly month, and most Of this time
has boon consumed Ia tho trial Of coupon cases.
During the session his Honor Judge Iiancocz has
been called upon Tor several decisions upon irn-
poriant Questions raised by counsel, aud upon
rloas submitted by defendants.
The court mot this mnining NJ II O'Clock
when The coupon cases came up for trial, aud an
olher opinion was rendered by Judge Hancock.
ON "Wednesday last In lie case OF the Common.
wealth e. Griswold judge Hancock allowed tho
defendant 10 lJe n spccinl pea OF tsuder. In
that tisn iho defendant paid into court ono
genuine COUPON Of the face value 81 fl50 and
ST. 30 n money, in fun Of his taxes. IN, interest
thereon, Gnl the penalty OF . per cent. and also
paidi into court the @um OF si61O IN money, Ia
iuu OF thc Commonwealth costs.
When the caso % the Commonwealth ~.
Uaryel was called the defendant, by his coun-
scl. nsked loayO 10 nle plea In which he ten
dercd the tax with interest and penalty but
made no tender Of costs. The Court took um0
10 conalder me motion and this morning Judge
Hancock delivered his opinion, refusing 10 allow
the plea to DO Glel. The poinfsot inierc,iin mo
case can be better understood b. reading the
opinion, which is as follows:
OPINION or JUDGE HANCOCK
Commonwealth rs. HaTr-H:
This Il motion, under tho act Of May p. 1857,
against LabOn 3. HaryclI, Tor the recovery OF
taxes due the Commonwealth, and for which. 70
is alleged, he te ldorcd papers purporlng q be
coupons Of Virginia IN payment thereof Tho
defendant. Without relying upon his oreipal
tender, comes into court aud GsEs leave CD NE
plea 81 special tender. Ia tni, plea he ayers Thar
he owes the STATE for the year 1881 - Tor tnyas,
with iateresf, anl per cent. penalty, amounting
I'm an 20 81 IL 4: and that he tenders I'm court
costume coupon Of the state 81 tue face value ~
$40, cut from one Of her duly issued bonls'
and siNty-fOur cents In money, DIT inaAes 90
tender OF costs. Has the defendant o legal F-AL
10 iile sucn plea ~ this CASEY To decide .nls
question II becomes necessary 10 inquire ara &c
tcTmlno the rights and duties OF per9ons VINO
tender coupons In payment OF their taxes. on
January ~, 1889. an hct was passed proy1ng how
persons may pay coupons III satisfaction o. taxes,
dues, aud demands duo tue Commonwealth
Tho at provides that no coupons shau be
received for taxes. uuiil It's genuineresa has
boen established by the verdict Of Jury. In
Antoni rs. Grrenh0w. ~ United states Repor7
page 1Gq the Supreme Court decided this arl 20
ne constitutional. In POindextef 49, GreenhOW,
ia Unitod states Reports. page 26J tho same
court decided that tender Of coupons Wa3
payment Vi taIcs n the extent OF divcsting the
collecting cficor u all rights 10 enforce ita coli
lection IN the case Of IN r. Ayers. - Uri.rd
Sirtes Reports tho same court decided that ih3
Stctc has the right io bring suits against suc1
persons as have rendered coupons IN payment
OF thoir taxes and has the night % compel ih0m
70 rroye the genuiueness Of tho coupons ton
dcrtd, and. II genuine, 10 deliver them " ne.
0acers iu tho manner prescribed by the act Of
Say H. 1SG. 1t Is clear therefore. under these
decisions that 10 tax payer VINO tenders coll
r0ns for his taxes con relieve himself entirely
irom res possibility for such taxes until he hs3
proved tue gcnuuenegs og tho coupons which ne
mas rendered, oithor under tho at o. Janu1y
"a, 1882. or under the act Of Nay u, 1871. Sllco
the decision IN ~ r. Ayers supra, 10 f. plainly
tho duty Of taxpayer who proposes 70 pay
his tLXes IN coupons 10 proceed under the
act 0, january H. lsS2 and dollyer Tho coupons
90 thc officer fo- Identification aud verihcluou.
II he refuses 10 proceed under thGt statute. but
IOliee upon the decision OF tho supreme Court
Of Tho United States In PoirJc xicrrs GreephoW.
aud by that means forces the STATE 70 bring
suit against him IN Ter Tie a.. Of Nay Il, ls,1,
he ought not IN such a case 70 complain II bis
motion ~ flo plea Of special tendcr, rendering
only tho tax, interest," and penalty, should DC re-
fused and denied. II plea Of this kind be al
iOwoI the remedy which The State has provided
by The act Of MAY ~. 1881, IS yaiuelcss. II this
plea Is permitted % be nlol and IT, avefuen.s
proved the rosul: will DO that the state gets a
genuine coupon and small amount Of money
in payment Oi taxes, Interest. and parc atty, VINE
for hcr COSTS. amounting 10 SOLO, she gets only
o tudg ment. in payment OF which, Wlen sho
proceeds ~ enforce 10, the defendant may make
tender OK coupons, WLicA tender Wa
necCssit2te auO.her suit by the Conn onWea .th,
and soieai ~ endless litigation. a constructor
,hat will bring about such result must 10
wronr. No statute should rec,iye construction
that w II defeat g. plain ooiTc, ana Intention. Il
inns been c0nfended. however, mat tho court I'D
the case Of the Commonwealth as. 6rl9WO-l,
tried on Ihursdsv last, allowed a plea oi t.-
same nature 10 be dled, aud that the ruling IN
that case should govern this case. IL viii b6 OBJ
served IN the case OF the Commonwealth 49,
GriswOlI that the defendant Ia lis special plea
II tenicr Which tho Court allowed nm ID
l.c. pail into court one coupon Of mo
face value OF $50 aud Sl.9 in money, IN
full Of his taxes. interest, and penalty; ana
that no also paid into cour1 sIOl9, ia iuI
OF all costs due the Commonwealth. That case
Is very different from this. IN That case the
Commonwealth bSs cotton all that she cal law
fully demand. SLc has lost nothing by me lall-
ure Of tho taxpayer 10 proceed under tho act
OF January II, 1882, berausc lie las PAID bis
taxes the interest thereon. the per cont. pencil
ty, and besides has pa'd ali costs That the COM
.nOnwealfh or her Officers have incurred 10y re4-
son Of his failure - prove MS coupons, unt.r
the act Of January u, 1892. again: II the spc-
cial plea of tender IN the case ~ tie COM
monwcalth rs. C.is6old had been refused
Judgment would have been given against fA" oe-
PENDANT. When the Commonwealth undertook
10 enforce that Judgment the defendant might
then have rendered coupons in payment OF me
judgment. and have thus ncce5sitat u a second
suit on behalf 81 tho commonwealth; whereas
by allowing him % file tho Aforesaid plea, Tie
whole controversy wGs g Gcd and the Common
wcalth's claim fully satisfied. Tho result I'm Tho
two cases is entirely different In Common
wealth IS. GriswOld tho nling OF tho plea pc
vented n second suit by the Commonwealth ID
enforce he's claim, while IN the case now On trial.
should tho plea Dc allowed 10 bo lied, it Will lc-
ccsaitata another suit boy The Commonwealth 20
collect her taxes and cost. 10 has been urged
b. counsel for the defendant that the costs In
This case belong % the officers Of the court, aud
not 20 the Commonwealth, aud therefore tho
Commonwealth Is not interested IN their cOlec-
ton. think lie position uu;enaule. Tho coats
belong % the Commonwealth. and can only ne
recovered by an execution IN her name. The
fact that the costs arc 30 be distributed 70 certain
Of her officers after recovery does not, Of Itself,
give those Officers any contest over them. These
officers have no interest In the costs until they
hayo been recovered. except 20 have them re-
covered. For these reasons Will refuse 10 allow
the plea TO be nle1.
The Attorney for Tho Commonwealth. after the
delivery Of the opiniOn. announced that he was
ready and desired 70 20 on With tle trial OF tho
other cases, hut the Judge decided % continue
the cases until the next term, a. the term q his
court ia DiRwiddie begins Tue nr5i OF next wees,
where cases Of the same kind arc ready Tor trial.
VALUABLE TRACT OF LAND SOLD.
Captain John c. Griffin, Of this city, has Just
sold the tract Of land vi 2OJ) acres on the noA-
noke river, IN North Carolina, known a. Con
mcnamara owned By 81. John Mann aud HIM
solf, and formerly the property Of Mr. Thomas
Dereux. one OF the wealthosI planters OF tho
Old North state The property WIS purchased
By a New fork party who win convert II into
stock farm. II is one Of the finest tracts OF land
in tho S:aie. and most beautiful home. The
mansion or II cost $4,000. The price for which
the tract is sold is SEQ 600. ROBIN ADAIE.