Evening star., 1895-01-04
Right of Commissioners to Exact
Penalty on Overdue Taxes.
JUDGE BRADLEY ON The LAW
A Matter Affecting Over a Million
Dollars ofDistrict Funds.
A LAWY YER'S INFO n

payers, and is there any law which i'm
poses such a penalty?
These two questions fraught with i'm
pcrtance are now before the Commission
ers. Upon their settlement depends large
fortune-over a million and quarter dol
lars. There is no Disgusting the Commits
sioners position. They are wcrried and
while they express great confidence in the
outcome of the matter, yet the bare pos
sibilty Of losing such large amount OF
money makes them anxious. Some days
ago the Commissioners mail brought
letter from Judge Bradley Of the Supreme
Court of the District of Columbia, pro-
testing against the payment of penalty
of 2 per cent per month upon certain lots
belonging to him. upon which the taxes
had become delinquent. 1t was small
sum, but the underlying principle was
startling in it's magnitude.
Similar requests had been received be-
fore, but they were simply referred to the
assessor and his report settled them. Ac-
companying Judge Bradley's simple re-
quest was the statement. boldly made, that
there was no law warranting the imposl-
tion Of any penalty for non-payment OF
taxes since the year 1878. Such a state
ment from a judge of the Supreme Court
of the District, backed up with declara-
ton that he had carefully examined the
law on the subject, filled the authorities
with apprehension.
Importance of Subject.
Assessor Trimble was sent for and care
fully reviewed the laws regulating the sub
ject He was directed to make a further
examination of the statutes and report
fully the facts and laws governing the
levying of tax penalties.
Assessor Trmble spent several days
searching the laws and finally submitted
his report to the Commissioners. ending
with the recommendation that Judge Brad
ley'S request be denied.
This report sets forth the Importance of
the subject and says if the contention of
Judge Bradley is sustained the District
will lose in refunds over one and a
quarter million dollars. A short summary
of the laws bearing on the subject is in
cluded the report. The first law upon
the subject was passed in 1877. Section
provides: THAT if one-half of the tax
herein levied upon the real and personal
property taxed by this act shall not be paid
before the first day of December. 1871. said
installment shall thereupon be in arrears
and delinquent, and there shall then be
added, to be collected with such taxes,
penalty of per centum upon the amount
and like penalty on the first day of each
succeeding month until payment of said in
stallment and penalty In this act it is
also provided: THAT this act shall remain
in force as a tax law of the District of Co
lumbia for each subsequent year after June
80, 1878, until repealed
Permanent Government.
The next year the bill providing for a
permanent form of government for the
District was passed, ard here again there
was a provision inserted which contin-
Ted the tax law of 1877 in force. The
section provided:
"Said District and the property and per-
sens that may be therein shall be subject
to the following provisions for the govern
laws applicable thereto not hereby repealed
and inconsistent with the provisions of this
act.''
Section of the same act seems to clnch
the position of the Commissioners, and
upon this they will rest their case. That
section provides
THAT all proceedings in the assessing,
equaizing and levying of said taxes. the
collection thereof, the listing, return ard
penalty of taxes in arrears, the advertising
for sale and the sale of property for de-
linquent taxes, the redemption thereof the
proceedings to enforce the lien upon un-
redeemed property and every act and thing
now required to be done and performed
and in the manner now provided by law
Sent for Opinion.
Again, when it is recalled that Congress
has from time to time remitted the tax
penalty of 2 per cent per month and al
lowed the same to be settled within a
specified time at per centum per annum,
it would appear that it presumed the law
governing the case sufficiently mandatory.
While the Commissioners approved the
opinion of Assessor Trimble in general it
was deemed wise after consultation to
send all papers in the matter to the attorney
for the District, Mr.. S. 7. Thomas, with
instructions to furnish soon as possible
a legal opinion upon the validity of the
law.
Nothing: to Say.
Judge Bradley, when questioned about the
matter today by a Star reporter declined
to be Interviewed. His letter to the Com
missioners, he explained, was more in the
nature of a private communication than
anything else. and he remarked that he
was surprised to learn that it had been
made public. Judge Bradley said that he
had not refused to pay the penalty, but
had merely questioned the authority to en-
fCrce the penalty.
CcmmiSsiOners' Flights.
Referring to the matter, a prominent
member of the District bar, said that he
very seriously doubted the right of the sDis-
trict Commissioners to impose any penalty
whatever He was of the very decided
opinion that no penalty could be enforced
subsequent to the time when the property
in arrears became subject to sale for such
arrears. AS he understood the law, lie
remarked, the annual tax upon real estate
became due on the first of November.
At that time. while the tax for the whole
year might be paid, if the owner of the
property so desired, the penalty could only
be imposed thirty days thereafter on the
first half of the years tax. The second
half of the tax, he said, became due the
1st of May following, and on the 1st of
June the penalty for non-payment of the
second half of the annual tax began to run
The law, said the lawyer, further provided,
it seemed, that no sale for non-payment of
either half of the tax could be made until
the 1st Of July following. Hence. it seemed.
explained the lawyer, that if a penalty for
non-payment Of the tax could be enforced
at all, it could not be enforced subsequent
to the 1st of July, when, it appeared to him,
the District Commissioners were required
to sell the property on which the tax for
the preceding year was in arrears. If the
property was or was not then sold, con-
tinued the lawyer. the penalty for the
taxes in arrears for the preceding year
ceased, and no further penalty could be en-
forced until thirty days after the first half
of next years tax had become due.
other Opinions.
Mr. s. T. Thomas the attorney for the
District, to whom Judge Bradley's letter
has been referred, stated that it would
hardly be proper for him at this time to