Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1890-01-16

4
lector shall do - there being yet
about two months In which he may per-
form bis duty In the collection OF taxes.
Not un II the first Tuesday OF March, can o
collector of taxos return his delinquent list
to the levy court. Nov the respondent, IN
his anBwer TO the application for the writ,
states In effect that he will receive the |
taxes OF any taxable who Will come
forward to pay them at any time De-
fore March next, or before he returns his |
delinquent list. As the possession OF o re- |
oeipt Tor county tax assessed TO another, |
especially II that other be unable from me-
oesstty to spare one day from his work IN
witch to pay 1t himself, gives the holder
certain control over the freedom OF choice
| at an election, II Ia not altogether unreas-
enable that Il collector desiring. as good
| citizen, untrammelsd exeroise OF the elec-
tive franchise, II he DO Inspired by such
sentiment, should decline TO deliver such
evidences Of payment Of tax to any but the
real person assessed for 1t. We do not
mean, by this remark, to be understood as
expressing any opinion of the bona hdes OF
| the course, with respect TO such receipts,
taxed by this respondent as such coliec-
tor, nor to give our approval to IL; but
simply to say that surprising his course to
| BIS nu honest one, no great fault should be
found with it--for every truly patriotic
| citizen has direct political interest that
all voters should at least have the oppor-
tunlty without dictation, or other trammel,
| OF voting their real sentiments.
/ Ia the spirit OF this, Two several bills were
INTRODUCED into the General Assembly al Its
last session to enact for Delaware law
upon what Is known AS the Australian
system; but the political managers OF
both parties cAueed these bills to bs
dsfeAted-the one introduced In the
House) by an adverse vote against IT; the
other introduced IN the senate) by the
nova. days improved mode OF references TO
a committee who never did, and were never
called upon to report 1t back for action by
the senatorial body. Either Of them would
have rendered futile lhe Efforts OF persons
to control the votes OF electors by paying
their taxes or other more direct form OF
bribery. But this is depression. Coming
back TO the question before us as legal
one (for we have no right 10 consider what
wa cannot but think Is Its true natufe); We
must decide the point raised by the Case
whether Il collt etor of taxes can refuse to
receive tux when offered to be paid by
the agent, or attorney,of the taxable. Tiers
being no question Of the right OF q taxable 10
make m attorneyto pay mis- tax for him with
the tANublss money, Il collector should not
hesitate to recslye 1t when offered to him
s1r that purpose; to do SO would, as said
before, be violation OF his official oath, a
breach OF his duty rs an ofilchr ;
and Of the stipulations OF the ON.
iRl bond. He would also be liable
In an action by tie taxable. IL he sui-
fered any DAMAGE, or dctrlment, by such
refusal. Ihb breagh OF trust would make
him liable to puollc prosecution by indict-
ment; and, of the stipulaiions OF his bond,
, by proceedings ut the instance OF the levy
|, court commissioners. In regard to giving
receipts for tax, provided for rs aforesaid,
,, the collector, AZ 3 matter OF duty, Is bound
, to give that; but 1t IL u receipt to the Tux
! AHA mud bA the IAnlinH
to give into any but his hands, as
giving TO him personally will be discharge
of such duty he must be treated as having
, at least m option or choice as TO whom II
shall be delivered and this court cannot In
! terfere with that Nor is there any real hard
, chip In this to the taxable considered as q
voter for mis- right to vote, supposlng him
; to have the other qualifications, depends
only upon his having paid the tax ASSESSED
against him, and not upon having the COL
tetor's receipt In due form to show for It,
: session OF II would be convenient and
!, ve trouble at tbs polls; but the law does
liz Ia nny case make the production of 8
eipt for tau sine qua non for the
: rcise Of the ballot; on the contrary
!, oDtemplates that parties paying taxe'
: ~ not have taken receipt; or have los
7 i islald one In fact taken. For such, /
2 OF oath Of payment OF his tax as vel
q q Of other qualification IS provided by sec
!
!, Uode, p.12l) IN these words; III q vote b.
\, objected to, Its admission or rtjAotion shal
= Ds determined according to the opinion 0
. / majority Of the judges Cot electton) bu
~ either OF the Judges may requlret hei nspee
I, tor to administer to a person Offering I
% vote on the ground OF having pat
70 tax and being otherwise quail
y y fed according TO the constitution
y the following oath or affirmation: "You d.
;. solemnly swear Cor affirm that you are Q
~ the age Of twenty-five years aud that yo
:. ut this time reside In this hundred and tRa
y you have not voted and will not vote b
~ this day In any other hundred and, tina
\, before the election; aud that you have
/, within two Yeas, paid county tax whic
e was ASSESSED at least six months before HI
" election" &c. Thus, although the La
~ provides for receipt TO be given to tn
= taxable on the payment OF his tax, and th
y collector receiving the tax is bound to Civ
= It ; yet possession OF 1t, or existence OF 1
q even, is not essential to the enjoyment {
= the right OF an elector under the constitr
Y, ton. Payment OF the tax assessed is th
10 essential thing; and that may be shown, /
the absence OF receipt, by proc
~ ~ OF witness to the payment, {
o the oath or affirmation of the ta6abl,
" At the same time the payment must, an
eo should bs, In the interest of q fair election
" with the tsxables own money, and not tht
~ ~ OF another person; for, II the constitutions
a., REQUIREMENT OF payment OF tax by the elet
y. toI-'huvs paid county tax" is the lal
NJ guAge-eould be satisfied by payment {
u his tax by some one else with that person
~ own money, then sanction would be give
~ to bribery upon a large scale-payment I
" the tax OF voter being one OF the meat
w resorted TO by oil professional politicians
~ control the votes OF poor men. AS thei
~ are none 80 poor as to be unable to pay
| III Ia uI,a mn nv h h
- own money, and not be subjected to Il
u, control OF another, 10 the exercise OF Il
w frhuchise, by the fact that such other ht
70 maid tho tax for him. We think II safe
y, say that, In the great majority of instance
Ils OF one man paying the tax OF another gr
~ ~ tuitousy, the ohjsct at bottom is not ehari
" at ALL but to have possession OF the ey
IN, denee OF the voters right to the ballot rs
iot means OF controlling the exercise OF 1t
10 70 the interest Of party.
10 Free, fair elections, with an untrammelt
~ body OF electors, Is what the welfare OF u
u State demands; but such cannot be 9
N tanned II men are allowed to pay taxes Z
a.. others with money OF the payers, and pc
ste sess themselves of receipts therefor. ~
lot argument In this case has developed q
~ fact that the notion Is q prevalent one IN
~ exhibit of the tax receipt Is required, Is
Ky prerequisite for the use OF the franchis
~ With mat In the mind OF the voter who
~ taX III phlQ LOT MN, II IL easy W eee IL
r. his desire to vote with mauy men pa
"a .ion) will induce him to do almc
w anything his generous friend VINO, at 4
AZ cost OF his own money, has paid the Il
the - rnting AZ howaver the task Of n ~
&C. lector would be difficult to ascertain fro
$50 a party Especially such as tender TO b
r., other peoples taxes) whose money he "
ain using to pay snother's tax with, and
7 q concern Of bis requiring Of him invea
rem RAtinn oi the faot. he can, ut lea