The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1897-02-17
COLLECTING PERSONAL TAX
A supreme Court Decision Cone~rn-
Ing the EnforeeEaenf OF the Tax
Lien On stocks of sona.

We have 10 end OF tTouh.s In coiIacffnE
personal ts1@s. said Deputy Treasurer
fa6den r. the county treasurar's cfEscs 70
reporter yesterday
We now have six ms- IN ira field II
that one department ard hey are net
with difscuiTies az every step Of TIE wa.
one OF the great obstacles that xe have
met with il from merchants OF other hold
srs OF goods vine have an szsa that ne tax
lien can be enforced. II az AZ only on shat
exact part Of the stock Of goods down 10
The very identical smallest spool Of thread
which was embraced in the assessment Of
AprL / Il Is maaifestIy unfair TO expect
thai the county can 20 70 work ana pick
out me precise items OF an inventory
when change as rapidly and as constantly
as the c0rpuscses of blood IL the human
body Fortunately. we have recent de-
ctsion from the supreme court OF the
state which. hope. Wiz go very far
toward setting some Of these destroyer
Gus taxpayers straight. ] really tnink the
Posf-fntelAgeacer would serve the county
a good turn and hep az materially in the
collection OF personal taxes II n would pub
fish digest OF that decision"
The decision referred 10 by - Padden
IL one which was handed down by the a.
preEne court at the close OF last month IN
me case Of AsIils Il Cowles a Tnurston
county firm. against the county OF Thurs
ton and George Gei1ach as treasurer Of
that county. Il was q suit TO resist the
collection OF taxes on the very ground
pointed out by MIR. Padden above. TIE
county demurred 20 the complaint. and the
lower court sustained the demurrer The
plaintiffs appealed. Stripped Of It's tech
Dscalities and few redundant expressions
which seem 10 be necessary In legal doc
ninent, the supreme courts statement and
decision are as follows:
1T appears that on April /. 1895. one
frost was conducting a retail hardware
store IN the city Of Olympia The stock
" goods on which the taxes sought 10 be
collected were assessed was owned by
Frost and his wife. and they continued
70 be the owners until some time IN Feb
rvary. lss when the stock was bought by
Nils A. Cowies The statute, section 81
page IS. laws fES. provides thai the
taxes assessed on personal property shall
be a lien upon all OF the personal proper
~ 30 assessed II the possession thereof
shall have been transferred. from and
after the LIST day Of January next sGoceetf-
ing the date OF the levy OF such taxes
so that on the fst day Of January prior
20 the transfer the taxes in question had
become a lien on the stock of hardware
But Il Is commended that the lien could
only ne enforced. II at al. upon that part
remaining OF the stock as II existed when
the assessment was made. ApTl 50, and
that since that time the goods had been
continually sold and others added to the
stock and iBtermingled with them. and
It was not alleged. however. says The
court, that there WAS not enough re-
naming OF the original stock from which
TO make the amount OF the tax penalties.
and furthermore. a sufficient answer 20
this contention is furnished BY the Well
established rule that the loss. IN such a
case. shall fall upon the party who caused
the goods to BE- mixed. and in this instance
Il was by Frost and his successors. the
plaintiffs. consequently any or the soo0s
can be taken FOR the tax.
ssT+ vvas Further c-qutendea that the only
transfer after which the statute author
laos the lien 10 continue Is transfer OF
possession. not 81 title. as Ia this case: .
tails contention the supreme court fepned
Tt IS evident that II the statute we're %
receive such a literal construction u would
serve little or no purpose X Is ven
known fact that a large amount 81 per-
sonaf property escapes ta1auon enI!Eey
due TO thu facilities afforded ~ the cnaf-
aeter Of the property for syading the COZ
le~ctlon % taxes thereon We see no fta-
son why the state should not have The
same protection that would De sven %
an Individual Had the plainuns puf-
chased this property subject 70 a mort
srage len. II would not De contended thar
they DIS not take IL subject 70 the TFlorj-
gage. Here was an exisIing lea No. 49,
Was A matter Of record upon these k9ous
~ the tirna OF the purchase, and the pl31h-
s5gys r,f,st - held 10 have had notice
OF the existence OF such Aeh anu 'A'@e
fka taxes were unpaid.
81, US further eontended that the right
of diatra!nt on the goods BY the county
authorities could he exercised onts
arNtnst the persons owing the TAX, @n1
800 "a hare The goods have been trans
erred ard the title - passed. the remedy
Il Iost on this point the supreme court
Is equally clear and positive Ine lar
rtlaEe of the decision Is; ~ Wc0i9 seeIa
that the goods not only pass snhyec{ -
the lien but subject TO the Fefneos- me
lien would lie Of little or no coase9eencs
II ~ were 20 cease upon me SAFE 81 ms
property 10 third party. 1910 a..
After citing numerous anth0t4b-ss' inc
decision concludes:
= ~ tne contention OF the plaintiffs we're
true 60 would destroy ne oVJest t"t
which the lien was given aud would fei-
der that part Of seeuon - rst@-iis .
personal property nus2tory. No oIntF
means Of enforcing the lien = provided
TIE statutes referred % must "a cor
str1led together. and enc part vii not he
given q cons trRcton that oulaHes g.
other part unless they are Clearly fncofl-
aINteut u il evident that th@ hen Nas
vfvpn Tor TIRE purpose Of tusUrtrG tne cca-
lection a. the tax ar2 % prevent q loss
hv reason % the trans.e r q the ptei' ~
srs,nrs - no reason Why the sumo rem
ofv ho,ala rot obtain against tire party
fsftr~h ssfrE IS against re oTiEtaAl owner.
=, Ear as IRE property purchased Is con-
csrnea The legislature had - mind ne
s.,bsA~fIen % the properly 90 the pawn x
- Sc ~ tr giving this EeG. r. ~her than
~ enforcing a mere personal ooAl@atl-sf l
~ me original owner. ne 1s-
cls!on Is affirmed
rs, ere " saia NJ. Pa6aen. triumphant
ly "a be finished reading TIE Seelsson.
Now. whenever an attorney, or tax
PAYER. or collector comes telling ne
.s,-, me trsuossiblHty g collecting a
- ha.as,sA ne goods have Been moved
NJ sold. ] simply shake tats oectsfen -
81. <sre. 1 fatnk - gAxpayers vii simply
read she decision. they vii give os m1eA
+.-- ss,-tfR,f, IN tire fufurA.