Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1891-07-09

OhAoio W tiic ohtu Ouiuttutt
W. SALISBURY, Chancellor.
THE PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION.
Only one collectors name is mentioned
in the bill, as this is test case, and a pro-
liminary injunction only. II has, how
ever, concurrent value in the direction Of
Collector Dougherty.
The injunction is addressed to the men,
bers OF the court, and also to Clerk of the
Peace w. P. Biggs. The sheriff will notify
each member OF the court and also the
clerk.
COMPLAINANT JOHN MEALEY.
The complainant in the bill Is John
Mealey, one of the sureties of George w.
Mckee. The plea Is that under lew Courts
present action the sureties' liability is in
creased without commensurate protection
III placing these names on the list and
stating that they will hold the collector
and inferentially his sureties in the
amounts therefor.
NOT LIKE THE cHuRcHMAN CASE.
The cases under the injunction are en-
tirely different from the Churchman case.
They do not interact or influence one
another in any degree. Mr.. Churchman
appeared personally and made affidavit as
to having paid bis tax for the tax receipt
1t is probable that had the individuals
on the 400 list appeared, or any one of
them and made complaint. stated that the
receipts were theirs, that 1t had been paid
or they had paid the amount and that the
signature on the receipts were genuine. the
present injunction would have no standing
in court. But none Of this has been done.
THOSE cRocoDILEs TEARS.
IL IS stated in regard to the Republican
managers present excessive desire to
legtimize the big bundles of thousands of
Qd IN nt,,te. ! 4.
ing IS TO recoup themselves next fall for
their expenditure Of the 81, 500 which was
subscribed for the acquisition of the tax
receipts. It is not in the least to save the
money to the county ms when the citizens
go upon the list they will have to pay their
taxes anyhow which the county must get
when receipts are now issued. The Re
pnblicans paid the money got the receipts
and want them recognized in order that
they do not have to pay by and by, when
they need these 4, 1000 men for voters. The
county. will probably through the exer-
tions OF both Democratic and Republican
members of levy court obtain all the
money paid i'll to the ex-tax collectors on
account of poll taxes. There is little fear
but the present action instituting the in
junction will lead towards that result.
ATToRNEy-GESERAL BiGGs.
Attorney Biggs said Monday morn
Ing that had these names been placed on
the assessment lists, or if they shall be, Il
will most likely invalidate the present tax
levy Of the county and there is grave
doubt if any taxes could be collected Il the
names are placed on the list
The amount of money to be raised is
already rated or apportioned to each tax
payer. This is established and no change
can be legally made. Now under the pro-
posed addition Of LOCO names, while these
names (when added would not be taxed
NJ all under the present levy. the names
already on the list would bear the brunt
OF the whole levy, thus developing the nm
constitutional status of some citizens taxed
and Others not taxed in other words dis
examination in taxation.
IL Is feared that some of the heavy tax
payers would refuse to pay their taxes nm
der these conditions and the attorney-ren-
eral fears but that their position is unas.
sailabe
oBsTRucTIHG COLLECTION.
The position Of County Receiver of Taxes
,lohn L. Dickey is growing more difficult.
The levy court is dunnng him for money
70 meet the hundreds of outstanding bills
they have drawn against the county
treasury. Yet they refuse to deliver IN
the tax duplicates under which authority
alone he is able to make collections.
WHY THE TREASURY IS EMPTY.
Mr.. Dickey states that the refusal of the
court to give him the books has prevented
payment of 100000 up to date. If the
representation be continued two weeks
more it will increase to $4,000.
There are scores of people applying
every day to pay their bills. The two
railroad companies, the p, w. & b. and
+. o. alone offered $4,000 taxes on June
10Th last, and have been calling every day
TO pay their taxes in order to make up and
balance their books by July 10th. County
Receiver Dickey offers to stay at the city
tax office to accommodate taxpayers and
give them receipts in order that the empty
treasury may be filled again.
Levy court met in regular session on
Tuesday. All the members were present,
also a number Of visitors. None of Che
Republican party managers were to be
seen. There seemed to be an appre-
hension of Democratic ascendency per
vading everything and everybody.
Whether this is attributable TO the ac-
ton Of the now notorious "injunctionr
and the disappearance Of the hopes Of
the 1000 cannot be said, but, at any rate.
1t was Democratic ozone that inyig-
GRATED the atmosphere on Tuesday, and
the other party, although in numerical
majority, were plainly mot in it.
NO COUNTY MONEY LOST.
Before court had been called together
a number Of officials, lawyers, &c, were
engaged in conversation over tho re-
iterated remarks of the Macs that the
county will lose money if the 1000
names be not placed on the assessment
lists.
A gentleman commented as follows
on the assertion:
The failing to place these names on
the lists will not deprive the county of
the public money collected BY the en-
tax collectors. The remedy is full and
complete as against the collectors for
the recovery of the money tnjustly and
unlawfully retained, ii such be the case,
without the names being on the assess
ment list.
The only effect Of these names being
left off the assessment list, uniustly if
so, is personal matter between tbe'col-
lectors and the alleged delinquents.
They in this case, can sue the collectors
for returning them as delinquents and
can sustain their damages as in law
provided. But in no case can the
county suffer a loss of money that the
delinquents may have paid to the col
lectors, Notwithstanding their return as
errors.
II the court can prove that the Will
mington collectors have received this
money it is recoverable from them or
their suretles whether they are on the
list or off it.
Now in regard to the claim Of the
Nens that the county will suffer thou
sands Of dollars of loss in not having
these names on the assessment list for
1891 it is absolutely false from the fact
that they are not assessed in March for
a tax in 1891 and cannot at this date be
assessed for the payment of tax for
1891.
INV