The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-04-08
COMPTROLLER's VIEW SUSTAINED

c. w. Dorr Believes Extension Of Time
Covers Both '92 and '93 Taxes.
The following interesting letter from
ex-State Senator C. w. Dorr, OF New
Whatcom. sustaining the position taken
by City Comptroller w. III. Parry on the
question OF the 90 and 'sS taxes. is self
explanatory:
New whatcom. Wash. April 5. 1875.
Wli II. Parry. Esq, City Comptroller.
Seattle. Wash--Dear SIR: have just read
your construction OF senate bill No. 275
relative TO the extension OF time for pay
ment OF the 1852 and 1893 taxes, as pub
lished in the Post-Intelhgencer of the
Sd inst. and fell satisfied that your po-
sition Is the correct one.
While 1 believe the provisions Of this
act might possibly have been made a lit
tie more clear by the use of different
words, yet | have not the slightest doubt
that the act does extend the time or
payment of both the 1882 and 1898 taxes.
And think your views upon this ques-
ton are amply supported by authority.
While IL is true that under the act OF
1881. the 1872 taxes might have been paid
in December Of that year, yet such taxes
were certainly not delinquent until March
LIST. iSsa (section 81. laws of 1891, page SID,
and IL Will be- noticed further that q re-
bate OF 3 per cent. was allowed in case
Of payment being made before January /.
I construe the words due and payable"
as used In senate bill 2.5 to refer to the
time when taxes became delinquent. or
such time as the county had the right
to demand their payment or impose
penalty for non-payment. And this con-
dition certainly does not exist prior to
the date Of delinquency. The period in
teryening between the LIST day of Decem-
Der and the LIST day of March seems to me
TO be analogous to the days of grace al
n ,ts-
point, in Daniel upon Negotiable lnstru-
ments 4th Ed sec. ei3, Il Is said:
"a bill OF exchange or negotiable
promissory note importing in its language
TO be payable upon certain day, Is
not in reality payable to all intents and
purposes upon that day; but ordinarily
not until three days after. according TO
the rules OF the law merchant. as Ii pre-
walls in England and the United States.
This period OF extension Of time is termed
days OF grace.
The word due as construed in the
judicial decisions. has a double mean
ing, dependent upon the place in which Ii
Is used 1t is sometimes synonymous
with the word owing" and in other con-
nections is used TO signify that de-
nand Is then payable. This distinction II
we'll stated by the supreme court of Iowa
In Township OF Jasper VS.. Township OF
Sheridan AZ Iowa, page iA, as follows:
1T is claimed by the defendant that
a fund Is due when the time arrives in
which payment Is enforceable. And II
must be admitted that this Is the ordtn-
airy meaning Of the word But, while
that IL So there Is certainly another
meaning somewhat broader"
And In United States VS., Bank OF North
Carolina. s Peters. on page 81;
The whole difficulty arises from the
different senses in which the term due
is used. II is sometimes used TO express
til nd
II is an equivalent TO owed. or OWING,
and II is sometimes used 10 express the
fact that the debt has become payable.
Thus. in the latter sense. a bill or note Is
often said 20 be due, when the time Tor
payment OF II has arrived. In the former
sense a debt is often said to be due from
a person when he is the party owing IL,
or primarily bound TO pay, whether the
time OF payment has or has not arrived
See also Allen vs. Patterson. n. y.
mage $50; Bowen w. Slocum, IL WIS. page
ISL: Hoyt vs.. Hoyt, Is New Jersey Law.
page siS: People VS.. Arsueiio' 81 CAL page
SIS
In Rapalje's Law Dictionary. volume 2.
at mage $40. we find the word payable
defined as follows:
''Payable-A sum OF money is said to he
payable when a person Is under an obi
ration TO pay It, Payable may there
fore signify an obligation TO pay at fu-
t1ire time but when used without quail
ft>ation payable means that the debt is
payaAle at once, as opposed 20 owing
"a W. In re Stockton. etc. Oh. d, luS-
SO that 80 seems clear 10 my mind mat
| the words due ard payable" as used IN
the senate hill under consideration refer
| 20 the time when taxes are deEnandahle.
as dist inguishes from the time the tax
| payer might have exercised the right 10
| pay and AVIAN himself OF the rebate by
50 doing.
1 -fynS tn
troversy which seems 10 have been en-
tirelv overlooked. - far as any published
| statement which has come under my no.
| ttca is concerned and that IL TINS: Al
| the ISs3 session OF the legislature, the
/ time for the payment or all state ana
| county taxes levied for the year lss@ was
extended until the fst 81 April. 1883. tSee
| session laws Of Isas. page - So that
| when senate bill No. rs Was passed BY
| the present session. which by SIS terms
| pur,orts TO relate 20 the penalfies ana
| interest az taxes which became dae ana
! payable in 1888. IL would seem that me lSsz
| taxes which had previously by enact
| mesErt been made payable on April l. us,
are most certainly within its purview.
| even though the other reasons were not
good
II should also be further remembered
Z m r,larsng a construction upon this act
| that unless the isga taxes are those in
/ tended 10 be affected nv being described
| as due ana payable IN the year lsss, then
| no ether state or county taxes are affect
/ 81, h.srause. the iS9S taxes did not become
| due or payable tzx4tn is94 and Il the lss2
| taxes were due and payable In lSaz then
| * follows that there were no tsxes due
/ ard rav4hle IN lss1 Such construction
! would % cour<s ysrove that the leEista-
! ture had attempted 20 extend TIE time
! for payment Of an annual tax A2ch
! never IN fact existed.
This I do not think. would ne rea-
/ SoTsshIe or logical constTUciaoa- 1 an
| ~errasn that vyhan the bill Was under dis
esssshan IL was stated BY the members %
TIE revenue COMMITTEE that It's sol. pur-
Pose vas TO relate 10 the taxes of Ike ana
!SS. and doubt X any member % the
legislature had any other Idea Very re-
/ spseltaliy. c W. Dot<A