The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1897-07-03
ARE TAXES DEBTS?
THE ATTORNEY GENERALS OPlNIoN
REVIEWED.
Authorities Bearing on the Question Cited,
HaTm is Debt the Legislative Ac- u
ton is Void.

;mnrisonment for non-payment of taxes,
is not unconstitutional.
Schedules A, b and comprise the
revenue act imposing taxes on the poll
apd nroperty. as we'll also as on profess
sions. trades. etc Section 53 of the reYe-
nue act reads: Such person or corpora
tions who are liable to pay the license
tox or taxes provided for in schedule a,
r and C of this act and the machinery
act. and shall fail to pay the same as
provided by law, shall be guilty OF mis-
demeanor and punished by hne not eA-
ceeding FIVE hundred dollars or lmprlson-
ed not exceeding six months" etc.
It is a Fundamental principle of Amerl-
can jurisprudence that State Constltu-
t;on is a limitation on legislative power,
and therefore when an act of the Leglsla-
ture contravenes any provision OF that IN
strument the courts will declare the act
mil and void; it is then said TO be uncon-
stitutional.
Tho Constitution of North Carolina,
Article 1. section 16, entitled, "Declara-
ton of Rights" says there shall be no
Imprisonment for debt in this State, eX-
cent in cases of fraud" Therefore, if
these taxes are debts, no fine or imprlson-
ment can be imposed for their non-pay-
ment.
No cases are to be found in our SUI
nreme court decisions, since imprisonment
for debt was abolished which involved
the point we are now considering, put
sufficient authority may be collected on
the subject of taxation, ] think, to justify
the conclusion for which L contend, tnat
Imprisonment as a punishment Tor non
payment of poll or property tax cannot
be enforced in this State.
do not assert that one can claim
exemption from imprisonment for nom
payment of license taxes for practtchg
a profession or carrying on business
taxed by law The argument following
applies only to poll and property tax
In the case of State and Gullford
County VS.. Georgia Co, 112 n. c., "a,
decided by our own court in 1893, Judge
Clark delivering the opinion, it is sad:
1.-THE defendant insists that tax IS not
| a debit is not, in its I1ost limited sense
that is, it is not liable to Set-ohs ana
other incidents of a simple contract pc
tween individuals. But 1T is debt IN the
higher sense of the word. In this sense
it is defined by Bowler as any KIND OF
just demand
The tax list is a judgment against
every person for amount OF tax, ana Il
Icopy delivered to the sheriff is an eXecu-
ton. Higgins VS.. Hinson, 66 n. e.,
l126. To the same effect is the act of
1897, CHI. 1863, section 30.
In the case quoted above Q12 n. %
the court further says: "All causes OF
action become debts after judgment"
citing Dellinger VS.. Tweed, sc n. o.,
I2O6; Rapal. & Lawr. Law Dict, PIP. 3d.,
800. webster defines debt to be thing
owed, obligation, liability The old ac-
ltiOn on judgment was an action of debt.
l3 81. Com, 159, and so is an action for
a penalty. The government has the same
fright to enforce duty as debt, and may
enforce it in the same way. People VS..
Seymour, 16 Cal, 332. When tax is
Imposed the taxpayer becomes debtor.
Saw Bank VS.. Z. S., 10 Wall, 227, citing
Attorney General VS.. AnStruther,
55S. A debt due the State for taxes is
a preferred debt. 1t is expressly recog-
nized as a debt and preferred by the
statute for the settlement of estates of
deceased persons The Code, sec. LAG.
following: whatever the law orders any
one to pay, that becomes instantly debt,
which he hath beforehand contracted to
discharge. The party offending against
a penal statute is bound by the funda-
mental contract of society to obey the
directions of the Legislature, and pay the
forfeiture incurred to the aggrieved
Iparty, or to any informer, or to the gov
eminent itself" Black Com, 156, cited
in Gray vs. Bennett 3 Met. (Mass.), 526.
Judge Cooley, in his excellent work on
Taxation, and which is regarded as very
high authority, says: "The law abolish
ing Imprisonment for debt has no appli-
cation to taxes, and the remedies for
their collection may include an arrest If
1.-THE Legislature shall so provide" and for
this ne cites authorities from the States
of Massachusetts, Kentucky, Alabama
and South Carolina. But an examination
Iof the Massachusetts case shows that il
docs not sustain JudgeCOoley's statement
lit refers only to summary or mesne pro-
cess for the collection Of taxes; that is
Imprisonment is allowed simply as a
means of enforcing payment or coercins
the taxpayer into disclosing the amount
condition or situation of his property, il
order that the tax debt may be satisfied
out of that, just as one has for years
been subject to arrest and imprisonment
in this State for concealing or removing
his property, with intent to defraud hi
creditors, and for several other causes
not necessary to here enumerate. But il
all these cases the person imprisoned maj
be released, after remaining in prison TO
twenty days, by taking the insolven
debtors oath, provided he cannot. in tn
: meantime, give bond conditioned to per
, form the judgment of the court in a sui
for the debt. The Kentucky case rele'
en- by Judge Cooley has no application
for that was case where the delinquen
Taxpayer objected to an execution agains
his property because he had been denie
- a trial by jury; and the South Caroln
!. and Alabama cases had reference to tn
constitutionality Of town ordinance a
IIoxu;nu mont for failura 70 no