Grand Rapids herald. [volume] (Grand Rapids, Mich.) 1892-1959, 1892-03-19
HOLD THE ACT GOOD
so SAY The SUPREME JUDGES
Their Decision Handed Down al Lansing
Yes,erday--Brie Synopsis Of the
Opinion.


court sustains the mortgage tax law.
each justice writing an opinion. That
of Justice Montgomery is the main
opinion. Chief Justice Moore and JUS
iice MeGrath eoneurring. and Justices
Grant aud Long each with dissenting
opinions. The main opinion Is some
what exhaustive, and instances the act
substantially upon the following
grounds: That ii was constitutionaliy
passed by both branches of the legisla-
ture; that the present act apples to
mortgages in force at the time OF its
passage. 1t also applies TO mortgages
held by non.residents. II applies TO saw
ings banks and insurance companies,
and mortgages held by them are to be
taxed AS real estate, deducting real es-
tate to the full value of their capital
stock.
There is nothing IN the tax law nor
the usury law, passed by the last legis-
lature that prohibits from agreeing by
whom the taxes should he paid,
although the interest agreed upon and
the taxes together would exceed the
rate OF interest which may be fixed at
s per cent by contract. The opinion
maintains the doctrine that the court
can 60 behind the journal TO ascer-
tain the constItutlonality of the pas
sage OF the act passed. He comedies
there is conflicting clauses in the jour
nal before the house. Chief Justice
Morse In concurring reIews the status
of the supplement" to the journal
which, it is claimed, contained a copy
of the bill intended to be passed. He
holds it TO be no part of the journal
and that it could only be so construed
by a series of presumptions, and to
allow the impeachment of legislative
action by nature of It, would he a
usurpatiOn of legislative powers by the
court. Every presumption. he says, is
In favor OF the due enactment OF the
law. Ii the journal is resorted to the
law can only fail when 1t appears from
1t that constitutional methods have not
operated IN Its passage.
Justice McGrath does not regard
it OF little Importance whether the
supplement is regarded a part of the
journal or not. The journal no where
shows that single amendment was
directed to it therefore, some other
bill must have been before the house
This appearing, it must be presumed
that some other bill was passed by the
house. There sixteen amendments
offered, and all of them could have
been in direct confict with the
supplement" bill.
Justice urant also reviews fully the
house proceedings in dissenting, ard
argues with Justice Long that the act
is unconstitutional, and that the
prexieting tax law 10 in force, and that
the act passed by tire legislature was not
the one signed by the governor. lie
shows that the bill as signed contains
clauses not acted upon according
to the house journal, consequently
the act must fail. He calls
especial attention to one in
stance. The journal supplement
Jntains a provision with reference
to the penalty Tor an agreement be-
tween the mortgager and mortgage.
The provision does not appear in the
act. The house journal shows no at
tempt to strike it out. BY the absence
OF this provision the law has no force
or effect. According to the intention
OF its trainers for taxation of mort
cages, we cannot presume that the
legislature intended to leave it out.
Justice Long discusses the other un-
constitutional features of the bill be-
sides the unconstltutlonahty of its
passage.
The whole tax upon the land and the
mortgage interest is made lien upon
the land and il may be sold as we'll as
the personal property OF the mortgager
to pay the tax of the mortgage. The
principal and interest upon the mort
gage may not be due for five years,
yet the tax collector may sieze the last
piece Of personal property under this
act of the mortgager to pay the tax of
the mortgage.
He also shows that the rates secured
by mortgage may become valuable in
transfers, by the endorsements upon
them anc fall into the hands of other
parties. and enforced against the mort
guger and he not be allowed to offset
the mortgages tax, that he has pad,
and he would have no means OF en-
forcing repayment from the mortgager.
The act permits the state TO take
the money of one TO pay the debt OF
another; il compels the mortgager to
make a payment upon the mortgage
long before II is due, SO that the state
may get its revenues. an act which the
constitution prohibits. He also dis
cusses the hardship upon the mort
gager before the board of review.
should he not appear. having the OBJ
portunity, he has no remedy, as he had
already has HE day IN CO urt or might
have had.
STARVING TO DEATH BY INCHES.