The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1896-07-19
LEVY Is SUS GAINED
Supreme Court of Oklahoma Renders a De-
cisior on Income Tax Case

cisioB on Income Tax Case.
Guthrie, o. T., July 1S.-The supreme
court assembled this morning and rem
dered a decision in the cases involving
the legality of the action of the terri
torial board of equalization in raising
the assessment in the various counties
in the territory. No opinion ever rem
dered by the supreme court of the terri
tory approached in importance the de-
cis3on In these cases. The opinion OF
the court was delivered by Associate
Justice Tarsney. The case in which the
opinion was rendered was the case from
Noble county. There were in the su-
preme court four cases involving prac-
tically the same question. from the coun
ties of Kingfisher, Noble, Logan and
Oklahoma Judge Bierer in the case
from Noble county held that the action
of the territorial board of equalization
was absolutely void, and had enjoined
the collection of the tax. Justice Nc
Aztec in the Kingfisher case had also
held the action OF the boad Of equaliza-
ton void and had enjoined the collec-
ton of the tax. Judge Scott in the
casa from Oklahoma county, had held
that the action OF the territorial board
was legal, and that ii had the power to
increase the tax. Chief Justice Dale in
the case Of Logan county had held that
tn territorial board of equalization did
not have the power to increase the as
sessment, yet the parties complaining
were eStopped by reason OF the fact
that they had been guilty Of laches.
The opinion OF Justice Tarsney is con-
CURED in by Associate Justices Scott
and Chief Justice Dale. Justices Mo-
Aztec and Bierer dissenting
The territorial board of equalization
had raised the assessment in the va3ous
counties in the territory by adding there
TO such per cent as IN the judgment
Of the board would make the assess
ment of the property fair. just and
equitable. It was contended on the
part Of those who were opposing the
payment OF the tax that there was no
power given the board by the statue by
which 1t could raise the assessment
on all the property. 1t was argued
that this was not equalization By
this opinion The action OF the board of
equalization is sustained In every par
sicular, the court holding that it had
ample power TO raise or lower tho as
seSsment of any or all counties as Il
seemed just and proper The court
bases this decision on its construction
OF the statue, and holds that the board
derives its power from the statue, and
that the language OF tn statue is SO
broad as TO furnish ample authority for
such action on the part 81 the board Of
equalization
Decisions IN other states and terri
tories are commented on at length and
are distinguished from this case. and
II is held that IN no other state where
IN question has been passed on II
there a statue the same as ours, and
hence that the cases cited from the
courts OF other states have but little
weight in deciding a question based
ON g. statute such as ours
This decision suStains the public
credit and Will prove of vast value TO
the people. Public credit gone. pr
NaTe credit also waneS. Had this rise
been held Illegal. every bond and war
rant under II would have been rendered
ValuiesS II would have been repU-
oiauen of the most ru.nous sort AS II
Is. the honor OF the territory and OF
every county IN II IS preserved.
Both the bench and the bar warmly
congratulated Justice Tarsney fer the
AFFINITY displayed in the opinion II is
pronounced by al the lawyers as first
among the weishtiest opinions rendered
by this court Tt showed througaeut
that Judge Iarsney is not only an able
lawyer, but his argument on the inn
portance of the public credit shows that
ne had been impressed with the greet
imporoano OF keeping inviolate the pub
lie honor.