The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1897-11-10

or not the county collector of your
county should accept county warrants
issued in 1895 and 1896, in payment of
taxes Of 1891
Il would first refer you to chapter &c,
page 259, of the laws of 1897, which pro-
vides, in substance, that county war
rants shall be taken in payment of
county taxes, city warrants in payment
OF city taxes, and school district war
rants in payment of district school
taxes, provided that state school taxes.
county school taxes and sinking funds
shall be paid in cash. This law, as
you viii observe, specifies what par
ticular taxes are payable by particular
warrants. The question whether war
rants issued for Indebtedness other than
that of the current year in which the
taxes are payable, can be received in
payment of taxes for the current year
presents, however, different question.
Section 3, Art. IA, of the constitu-
ton, prohibits any county from Great
ing any Indebtedness in excess of the
taxes for the current year, unless the
proposition to create such a debt shall
have been submitted to a vote of the
qualified electors, etc.
THE supreme court of Utah. in the
case OF Fritsch VS.. Board of County
Commissioners of Salt Lake County, Al
Pacific Reporter, 1,026, in constituting
this provision of the constitution. held,
first, that the county Should create no
debt during the year without a vote.
which the revenue of that year would
not pay. Also that a debt incurred in
one year could not be fioated over to the
next year and paid out of its revenues
without a vote The Indebtedness of
the year must be paid out of its reve-
nue.. The supreme court also held that
if any portion of the revenue of any
year in the treasury on the first of the
next year is applied to the payment of
the Indebtedness of the latter, an equal
amount of it's revenues should be ap-
piled to the payment of the indebted
ness of the former year, if required.
The warrants issued by your county
in 1895 and 1896 were issued in payment
of Indebtedness of those years respect
lively, and should have been paid out
of the revenue of those years or your
county should have awaited itself of the
provisions of the law allowing it to is
sue bonds to take up its outstanding in
debtedness.
"'It seems clear that the payment of
taxes for 1897 in warrants of 1895 and
1896, which, as above Indicated were
issued in payment of debts incurred in
those years, would amount to a pay
ment of the Indebtedness of those years
by the revenues of the current year
1897.
"Such payment of the Indebtedness
of former years would amount to a
| floating over to the next year of the
| Indebtedness incurred in those years,
and a payment of it out of the revenues
of the current year. This, in our opin-
ion, would be contrary to the construc-
| ton of the constitutional provision laid
down by the supreme court in the case
above referred to
You are. therefore. advised that
| your county collector is not authorized
to accept county warrants issued in
| 1895 and 1896 in payment of taxes for
the year 1897.
LAS to the payment of current taxes
/ in warrants of the current year, you
should be governed by the restrictions
provided in the laws of 1897, above re-
ferred to.
II am unable to furnish you a copy
of the decision in this case, but you
will find same in the Pacific Reporter,
as herein suggested. Very truly yours,
"A. c. BISHOP.
Attorney General.
'By B. X. Smith, deputy"