The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1897-12-08

section. that the forfeiture. like fne,
| should inure TO the benefit OF the Com
monwealth, so that II one OF our citizens
| Is TO be punished. all the citizens ana not
one should get the beneft OF his loss.
There can be no question that there are
| occasions when penalties should be en-
forced for delinquency OF It's citizens. and
| II loss falls on the individual he cannot
| complain, but under this law, ~ inter-
| preted by the Court Of Appeals. an oppor-
| tunity Is given 10 wrong the citizen
| without material Benefit to the State and
| under circumstances which must shock
| the sense OF Justice OF any right thinking
| man. The object OF laws looking TO the
] enforcement OF taxes should be TO require
| the tax 10 be paid and 10 enforce It's pay
mcnt by the operation Of the law with
certainty. and at the same time with as
| little injury to the delinquent taxpayer
| as possible. Such Is the principle upon
| which the state should deal always with
| those OF her citizens who do not meet
their pecuniary oligations 10 her.
This Is not the underlying principle Of
| this law. however as is shown by an
other Illustration. which IL stated as our
| second objection. and which may be va
ried In numbcrless shapes.
+. owns tract Of land in the county
OF Campbell. near the city Of Lynchburg.
The tract Is worth in tho case from which
we draw the illustration 5000. r. dies
and the land passes under his will TO his
INFANT son and a nephew. who live not
more than a mile from Il, but within the
corporate limits of the city. When +.
died one years taxes were due, and al
though. +. left a good estate. there was
confusion I'm its administration. and no
one paid this delinquent tax. The land,
under due process Of law. was sold. and
In fxHo
afterwards. r. maKes application to the
clerk 20 purchase IL for the amount Of the
delinquent tax. under this law. and the
notice is placed In the hands Of the sheriff
OF the county. who does not find T.. be-
cause he Is dead end does not find the
Administrative. because she (his wife,
lives in the city Of Lyhchburg. out OF his
jurisdiction. and thereupon the applica-
ton 10 purchase the land for the amount
Of the delinquent tax. OF s2j or $50. is
published in n little newspaper issued
from Brookneal. small village situated
IN the most remote corner of the county.
thirty miles from the city Of Lynchbure,
and from the land.
Tpon the farm. one Of the devisees had
placed a mortgage 20 secure loan made
10 him by a lady OF small means who
lives in a distant county. Fortunately.
just after the advertisement had been
completed by appearing In the rural pa
per for four successive weeks. some one
curious in such matters happened to see
IL. and thus the attention OF those in
terested and really owning the land was
called 10 the dangerous position in which
IL was situated, and the taxes, together
with all costs and interest. were paid
Had this not been done. and had three
weeks more elapsed without knowledge
coming home TO the parties in interest,
deed would have been made TO r.. the
applicant and the land would have been
confiscated 10 him for the trifing sum
of something over $50. and n loss would
have been inflicted upon every person
connected with II including the state
and. by virtue of the decision In Thomas
VS.. Jones including the poor woman who
had lent her money upon the faith OF one
moiety Of the property.
Now Il may be said that the poor wo-
man who lent her money. the administra-
trix who lived in Iynchburg. and tho de-
visees ought to have looked out and not
allowed this tax to have accrued. That
is all so. but human experience teaches
that negligence in these matters is univer-
sal. and common justice should teach ms
that for mere negligence so heavy a fine.
amounting IN this case 10 nearly 5000.
should not be imposed Generally this de-
fault results more from ignorance than
from wilful negligence. II is true that in
this particular case the infant might
upon attaining his majority. should he
ever do so. and If he ever heard OF his
loss. have a day in which 10 redeem. but
that IS but a poor privilege 10 a little
child thus robbed Of his inheritance.
As stated above. these illustrations can
be repeated in infinite variety. The two
that | have given are enough. There Is
no lawyer I'm this Commonwealth who
has not had similar cases and many
cases OF even greater hardship. Certainly
it cannot be that the power Of the Com
monwealth is to be used thus 10 crush our
citizens merely that tax which by due
diligence can easily he otherwise collected,
may be enforced.
The constitutionalty Of this law NAV
be attacked on various grounds but ] am
merely attempting TO bring home TO the
mind Of the Legislature its practical ope-
ration. not 10 make an argument for the
decision OF the courts.
/ admit the necessity Of vigorous and
even harsh action for the purpose of en-
forcing the payment Of taxes due the
State, but the power OF the state 10 do
so-a power which should always remain
nnlmpaired should be used with MI the
iudicious gcntleness which should ever
be the attribute Of the sovereign.
The law OF which 7 COMPLAIN has
brought much money TO the Golfers Of the
State. Due diligence on the part Of its
collectors in the counties would have
brought as much. and would have
brought il long since. II Is no. altogether
the negligence Of the taxpayer which
produces the delinquent. He or she. az
the case NAV be. awaits the action of the
collector TO n very large extent. and the
collector finds it far easier TO return the
property delinquent than TO take the
trouble TO enforce by levy. where his
compensation is but a small commission.
The fact that a large amount may be col
lected under the operation Of this law
cannot he properly urged as reason
why the law should be continued. The
lash of the cruel task-masters in the dla-
mond mines on the Congo may make the
yield Of the mines larger but IL cannot
ameiorate the torture or justify the
wrong done the victim.
3. II is another vital objection 10 this
law that the notice by which the final
conhscation occurs is given. not 10 the
owner of the land but TO the person in
whose names ii stood at the time Of the
original sale TO the State. a person who
may not have a dollars worth OF inter-
est in the property. and in many in
stances, indeed. I'm most instances. has
no interest in H. for. as we all know a |
mere naked legal title often remains in |
party long after his beneficial interest |
has ceased and after he had forgotten
that he ever had an interest in the land. |
yet his name stands upon the tax book |
as the owner. although he has disposed |
~ his interest lonc aco THE ovch, not |