The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1896-03-29
THE DISTRICT SCHOOL TAX.
Patriotic Action Taken BY thGChGSaleaEG
and Chic Railway,
DECISION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS.
In the Case of the y. v. +. and ~ H. H. 90.
Against the Supervisors OF Nor'h-
ampion County Brought About the
Condition The Correspondence.
The following interesting correspond
encc ia eeif-cxplanatory.

The following interesting correspond
ence is scii-cxplanatory
Richmond. Va, March o. 1896.
Mr. H. IT, Wickham, General Solcitor'
Richmond Va.
Dcar sir-My attention has been called
by you 10 the recent decision OF the Couit
of Appeals OF Virginia ln the case OF me
n s. j.. and N L. X. Co. against the
Supervisors Of Northampton county, IN
voivinc the uowtr OF the Board OF super
Nis0rs TO tax railroad property ior els- e,
trict school purposes and / Wish 10 Bay
- ,f-Tsnd through you TO the taNin@
officials or the state OF Virginia, lndt u
A. not the desire or purpose OF the Nle9., =.
peake and ohio Railroad Company 70
avail itself OF any technicallty 10 eEaue
ifs due proportion OF the public burdens.
Tho rate being uniform, an progely
wixnin the taxing district shoull btat
its like proportion OF taxation, anu il, III
consequence Of failure 10 proElue ma
chintry Tor tho assessment or ulsulC'
school faxes such taxes could be teih-
poraruy oVadcd by one species or prog.
orty. and the burden on the propeIly o.
others thereby increased, siiouiu ,., ~, iaT'
wish 10 take advantage or such position.
IL may DE that the county authorlucs
can. hy changing the rate OF levy lor
county school purposes rehoer cois'ue' q,
tion of fhis subject unnecessary, oi IL
may be that the General Assembly at a
future session will have the power 10
retroactively cure the present want OF
authority In the Board OF SUPERVISORS III
making levy for district school purposes
Independently. however, OF these CON
siieraiions 1 do not think It wise policy
10 emhnrrass tho educational system OF
the state. and hope II may be the luns-
mcnt of the other railroads OF me Seave Sa,
10 come 10 the same conclusion Aou wiz,
therefore. not raise this Question Ia any
future tax bills that may be presented.
Yours very truly
fsirneD VI. +. INGALLS,,
President.
REFERRED TO TIE GOVERNOR.
Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad CO...
Richmond. Va, March % 1870.
His Exccucncy Charles i. OFerfdll' DoV-
crn0r of Virginia:
pear sir.-I beg TO enclose herewith copy
OF "a lcttcr-(thc above)-frOm Mr.. lhsans,
president OF the Chesapeake ana ONO
Railroad Company 20 me, dated MaISh
. 1896. in reference % taxes upon Ia'I-
road property for district school purposes.
j was not aware OF the nature OF tIs
questions involved in the case or \. J.
and ~ r. R. Co. against the Board OF
Supervisors of Northampton county unln
] saw the opinion of the Court or Ap-
peals published I'm the newspapers atteI IL
was delivered. AS soon as II was pracu-
cable / brought the matter TO the AtleIl-
tion Of the president Of the Chesapeahe
and Ohio Railway Company. ana am
pleased that Dee has taken the broad view
OF the question indicated IN his letter
An examination or section - IuciS
Will OF the Constitution OF Virginia, ana
sections 1868 eighth clause. 1906, third
clause. and 1920 of the code, LEADS me 70
believe that the question Is not piaclSalS
50 serious "a one as appears upon lls l"[o,
and that the school funds neeu not 20
seriously diminished, as l am incllnea 10
believe that IN many cases the boalus ot
Supervieors can. by changing the rate OF
levy for county acuou4 PURPOSES IcCo-D
any diminution which the school system
may sustain In consequence OF the failure
OF the legislature 10 provide proper ma.
chinery for the collection OF the dlSir'cl
school taxes. -
ciaIly Co0ley's Constitutional Limitations
Cooley on Taxation BurrOughs on IaNa-
tlOn. and the American ana Ensilsn I-ilts
ciOpaedla Of Law-incllnes me 10 tnc
further opinion that in the event that the
poards OF SupervisOrs continue as hereto
fore To- levy the district school taxes, IL
will be competent for the Legislature
hereafter tO rctroactiNcly cure tne present
want OF authority I'm sald podIu 10 Hlaho
said levy hy providing the necessary ma
chlufrf and confirming the acuon or the
boards o. crtOi0rc taken.
ann aware that authorities can be aQ-
ducrd d. tine effect that where the tri-
hunal levying the tax had no power 10
do thc acl boo question. such act is Nold
and cannot Doe validated by subsequent
legislation. but j think the welgnL ol
authority is strongly is iaNor OF ihe
valfliv and efficiency or such retroacuNe
LEGISLATION The Attorney-General. how
ever. can fully advise in the premises,
and whtthcr I De correct or not IN the
view taken j am pleased 10 De aDlc 10
inform you officially that / am directed
not To- raise tine question Of want OF au-
thoritv in the Board of supervisors 20
levy district school taxes in my bills mat
mas bee hereafter presented against the
chceapoaxc and ohio Railway Company,
and That the Chesapeake nd Ohio RAN
road Company will as heretofore. con-
tnue 20 pay It's tax bills as presented,
taking care only TO see that the rate or
taxation on IT'S property is the same as
that on tne property OF other persons IL
being the purpose of this comany TO bear
AS due proportion OF the public burdens.
Very respectfully,
tgirnnlJ H. Il. WlCkiAM,