The Windham County reformer. (Battleboro, Vt.) 1876-1897, 1896-03-06
ABOUT THE Law Of IT.
\ taxpayer Who Talks of Resisting Pay.
Wcnts-What Local Lawyers Say
How the Right to Resist Ras Been Lost
Moral and Probably FegaIly
To tho Editor of the Rcformcr

or ~ hummer uI times Wltnln Lnc las
few months, while distinctly assertin
that taxation of the people to build al
opera house is clearly illegal, /
proposition that no reputable iawye
will dispute, - you have nevertheless
insisted that voters and tax payers ar
now henorably. precluded from al
further opposition to, or resistance of
such taxation, because majority o
them failed to appear and vote agains
1t in town meeting. Are you quit,
sure that this position is tcnahle IL
this extent:
AS regards any action which tn,
town may properly and legally take b,
a majority vote in town meeting. /
grant you that fault finding anc
kicking are unbecoming in those
who were voluntarily absent. or re
manned silent when such vote was
taken. SO far | 60 with you in youl
conclusions; and perhaps you meant
nothing more.
But how about action that the town
has neither legal nor constitutional
right to take? Towns are organized
and authorized to do certain necessary
things and exercise certain necessary
functions for the general welfare Of all
inhabitants: but there are also great
multitude of other things that towns
are not organized and authorized to do,
and cannot legally do; and among
these illegal things is the lavying of
taxes on the people to build theatres,
opera houses. churches, &c. The con
stitution and law wisely leave these
things to be done, il done at all. by
voluntary association and contribu-
tions of the people, ard no citizen or
taxpayer can be legally compelled TO
contribute to them against his will,
town vote that he shall. Now is this
lone taxpayer, because he failed to
appear and oppose this illegal tax levy
in town meeting, bound in honor
thereafter TO cease all opposition to
it: | will not so far impeach your
moral ability to discriminate between
right and wrong as to suppose you
mean anything so monstrous as this.
To illustrate Suppose the selectmen
should put an article in the warrant
to see if the town will authorize you
to commit highway robbery or some
other unlawful act during the coming
year with impunity, and that such
authority should be granted by unani
nous vote. Would any citizen robbed
by you by virtue of this vote be honor
ably stopped from prosecuting you.
because he failed to 60 to town meeting
and vote against authorizing you to
rob? Surely not, " everybody will
eXcaim; for nobody is bound n at.
tend town meeting to defeat what the
town cannot legally do Very well.
this is precisely the point | make, viz:
that no voter, by absence from town
meeting and failure to oppose action
he disapprores, is thereby in any way
or to any extent honorably precluded
from subsequent resistance TO any action
OF the town. no matter what the
majority in its favor, which is. in
itself. Unconstitutional and illegal.
In matters within the sphere of the
towns Legitimate authority the good
citizen will be content to make his in
tiuence felt in town meeting by voice
and vote but touching all action trans-
cending the legal authority of the
town, he has full liberty to select for
himself the time, place and manner of
his resistance; and when right prevails,
it may happen that. he standing alone,
will bc the legal ma iority.
The persistent, though futile. at
tempt of the opera house promoters to
hide, by clumsy misnomer. the true
character Of the job they were doing,
betrays consciousness on
their part that both the things done
and the projected payment for il by
TAXATION, are alike without legal war
rant and foundation.
Vkic much 10 'rkot .o;th.,
a unanimous vote in town meeting,
nor an cx post facto 'legalzing' act
Of the Legislature, has ever made, or
ever can mako, radically illegal act
legal. \ Taxpayer.
Brattlehoro, March I. 1896
We have taken the Opin ion of five of
lur the lawyers on the subject. One of
them says IN enabling act will mako it
al right, because the power of the
legislature is so extensive that what
ever it cracrs is binding unless pro-
libited by the constitution. There is
40 such prohibition expressly, but
~ fair inference. it seems to us. in the !
and Limitations of municipal /
power. there is. Certain it is that if |
he bars are let down in such case |
is this there is no guard anywhere |
saginst the completest socialism, no |
for the individual taxpayer |
against the power of majorities, no /
in the line of taxation and I
expenditure that a government Of law
8 supposed to provide.
Two other lawyers say substan
tally as "TaXpaysr'i does. that no act
II the legislature can legali2e anything /
hat was illegal de noyo. But as to
my practicable remedy, they express
rave doubt of its being in reach.
'he courts would be pretty likely to
lunt hard for some way to prevent Il
re bound by all the moralitics To
ay. and wouldn't they find good
round in the theory that any right to
void the expenditure has been for
cited by non user? There was not
My the vote of the town. but long
eforc and work began. it was known
D all our citizens that this opera
ouse plan had been accepted in its
enerai lines. 1t was then the right
any citizen 10 get out an iniunc-
ion. and we have nst particle of
oubt that that would have stopped it,
tut not a single man did, we All sat
till, allowed the expenditure 10 be made
nd the obligation incurred, took all
he benefit from il and are receiving
/ now in the way of rents from the
all. Now the commonest coDisdcra-
ion of honesty forbids our refusing To
ay for what we have taken. on the
round that we had no right 10 take
!!
If Republication were possible. as We
q not believe it is. under all the cir
it would mean that either