The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-05-30

ING scone and object And they give much
weight to the Interpretation put upon 1t at
the time of it's enactment, ana since by
those whose duty it was to conStrue, exc
cute and apply it. 1t is well settled that
the contemporaneous and long continued
practice of officers required TO execute or
take special cogniZance of a statute Is
strong evidence of its true meaning, put
not controlling upon the courts. II mas
been held that a practical construction
given to a law by custom shall be regarded
by the courts as equivalent to positive
law. Commissioners, ETC., VS.. Bunting III
1T is contended by the plaintiffs counsel
that there should be a strict constructor
of the law against the taxing power, WLlle
counsel for the defendants contend that
liberal construction should be given in FAVOR
of the taxing power; and there are authorl-
ties supporting each of these contentonS;
but better and a more reasonable RUE
than either is not to construe too strlctiy
the law which eXacts share of the pubic
burden from citizen; nor SO nperaIl "a IN IN
GHNor of the taxing power as laws INTENDED
to effect directly some great pubic opJecI;
but rather to construe the law or taXaton
fairly for the government ana justly LOT ior
the citizen, so as to carry out the INTENTION
of the Legislature gathered from the IAN
guage used, read in connection win tne
general purposes of the law, IN tne Hght 81 %
the facts and conditions existing at the
Bearing in mind all the above, and nu-
merous rules, for my guldance IN e1aln ~ ~
ing the statutes and the Constitution; also
considering all the rules ana principles OIL
the law bearing upon the subject or taXa-
ton, which have been so fplly anu C ,I;d1g
presented in the argument, / am convinced
beyond any doubt that 1T was not the legls-
Iative intent in the enactment of any or the
statutes of this State to levy any tax upon
any policy of life insurance.
NO STATUTE FOR TAXING POLICIES
81 find no statute, PAST or present, In
NV Investigation. in this State or in any
other State referring to life insurance pol
icies with any purpose of making them
subject of taxation, and I am cited to no
instance where any government has ever
levied any tax upon life insurance poll
cies. and I am cited to no instance, until
the acts of defendants complained of by
the plaintiffs herein, where any oHlcer OF
this or any other State ever attempted 70
levy on such property any such tax or
ever claimed it was made by law the SUP
iect of taxation, as it is now attempted
If the life insurance policieS are py the
terms of these statutes subject to taxation
as being personal property WITHIN the
meaning of the statutes and Constitution
subject to taxation under similar statutes
in this State and most all or the states,
practically. since they were such states.
''In the light Of the facts and clfcum-
stances Of this case no court could hesitate
for an instant to conclude that these stat
utes do not clearly express the intention
raise such doubt as to require the court to
call to it's aid all the many rules OF con-
struction which may aid it to make
proper Interpretation of the intention of the
LEGISLATURE; and when we consider these
Statutes in the light of the law bearing
upon the subject and all of the existing
facts and conditions it seems to me equally
clear that it was not the intention of the
Legislature to levy any such tax and not
the intention of those who adopted the
Constitution TO require any such tax.
There are many points discussed by coun-
sci which / think it would be unWise for
me to refer to, as the conclusion / have
reached makes their consideration unneces-
sary 1t has manifestly been the policy of
this and all the States of the general gov
eminent from the beginning TO the present
time not to tax life insurance policies, and
such policy has been so universally and
uniformly acquiesced in that it has become
a matter of history.
''If for any reason the time has come
or shall come when the people desire to
change that policy it is an easy matter
for them to do so in the way the people
have provided for themselves, through
their legal representatives 1t would in
my opinion be a dangerous peryersion of
the principles of our government to estab-
fish a precedent that a state board of tax
commissioners, however eminent and
worthy its members. might direct, control
or change the policy of the state govern
ment in matter of so vast Importance
and one that has so especially been re-
served to be exercised by the people them
selves through their representatives in the
Legislature. For the reasons stated the
finding will be for the plaintiffs and the in
junction will be granted against the de-