The Union times. [volume] (Union, S.C.) 1894-1918, 1896-01-17
THE POLL TAX AND SCHOOLS.
A Decision OF General Interest
Throughout tho State.


matter of the poll tax school fund ques-
tien raised by the school district of tho
city of Columbia through John p.
Thomas, Jr., Esq. The matter invol-
YES considerable amount of money in
Richknd county, and no doubt in a
good many others, for the custom or
the tax department has been knocked
into cooked hat, and the money will
no longer go into the ordinary county
fund.
The court says in substance:
This was an act of the board OF
school commissioners of the city of
Columbia vs.. l.. b. Folk, county treas
urer, praying for a writ of mandamus
requiring the treasurer to hold certain
money received by him as poll taxes to
the credit of the school district of the
city of Columbia and report the same
as collection of poll taxes to the board
of commissioners of the school district
| of Columbia and that he shall pay out
the same upon tho warrant of the said
board of school commissioners.
The facts out of which the contro-
versy arises do not seem to be disputed
and are as follows On the 31st of
December, 1894, the time limited for
the payment of taxes without penalty,
levied for the fiscal year 1893'94,
tLere were large number of persons
residing within the limits OF the school
district of the city of Columbia who
made default in the payment of their
| poll taxes. Thereupon the county
treasurer made lists of such defaulting
taxpayers, adding the penalty of 15
per cent on the poll tax due by each,
as prescribed by law and placed the
same in the hands of the two trial
justices for the city of Columbia
Tradewell and Troy-together with
atfidavits that the persons therein
named had made default in payment of
their poll taxes. In q few instances
warrants were issued against the de-
faulting taxpayers, charging them
with misdemeanor under the provis-
ions of Section 377 of the criminal
statutes as revised in 1898. In those
instances where the parties were tried,
convicted and fined, the fines were
paid over to the county treasurer as
required by Section 800 of the revised
statutes, for county purposes For
the fines thus paid over the county
treasurer, the relators make no claim,
because at that time the act of 1894,
appropiating such fines to school pur-
poses had not been passed, and hence
under the law as it stood the county
treasurer was justified in holding the
same for county purposes generally.
But in large majority of instances
the defaulting taxpayers paid their
poll taxes with the penalty added to
the TRIAL justices without having been
tried or convicted and without being
fined for the misdemeanor in failing to
pay their poll taxes, and the contro-
versy is as to the moneys thus collected
by the trial justices and paid over to
the county treasurer, that officer claim
ing that such moneys are applicable to
county purposes generally, while the
REALTORS claim that such moneys being
the poll taxes voluntarily paid by the
defaulting taxpayers exclusively for
school purposes and should be SO held
by tho county treasurer. Inasmuch,
as one of the conceded facts in tho
case is that when a. defaulting tax
payer made the payment to the trial
justice, he was given a receipt on O
|
general and delivered to the county
treasurer and by him delivered to the
trial justices, specifying that the
money paid was for poll tax with the
penalty added, we do not see how it
can be questioned that such money
was the proceeds of the poll tax, and
as such by the express terms of tho
Constitution as well rs by the terms of
the statutes under which such tax was
levied, exclusively applicable to school
purposes. This money certainly did
not arise from fines imposed by the
trial justices for the parties paying it,
never arrested, tried or convicted for a
r.isdemeanor for not paying their poll
tax, and therefore were not and could
not have been fines.
II is contended, however, that after
the expiration of the time allotted for
the payment of the poll tax, the county
treasurer has no authority to collect
the same, and can only prosecute tho
defendant for misdemenor, and If the
treasurer cannot collect it himself,
neither trial justice nor any other
person could act as his agent in the
collection of it. We cannot accent
this view The object of all tax laws
is to secure the collection of the taxes
imposed by lawful authority-and if
such laws contain provisions for en-.
forcing the payment Of taxes it by no
means follows that the collecting
officer is forbidden to receive the taxes
and penalties thereon after the time
limited for their payment without
r, sorting to tho stringent rcuedic.
provided for enforcing the payment of
taxes. Such n view would sacrifice