Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1898-02-06

1t 5 claimed that the authority to levy
this tax o. twenty cents is given by AN
Act to create a Fire Department Fund.-
Statutes 1865, 32S, and amendment thereto.
Statutes 1881, ITO. of which Act Section |.
provides; The County Commissioners
of the various counties of the State of
Nevada are hereby empowered to levy
and collect a tax of not exceeding one
half of II per cent, upon the assessed
value OF property within an un%incorpor-
ated town for the benefit of the Fire De-
par.,Icut in such town."
Co.....e. CrF apTrI2"t contends that me
. said set of 1860 did not apply IT, Gold
} NV. '>""o''So NJ ilnt ti~rn = -vHS aH iU-,tr-
pora, ~:, ana neice that the amend
ment of 1881 dOes not apply because the
original act did not and does not so apply.
{ The amendment of 1881 simply raised the
limit of the levy from onc-quarter OF one
per cent TO One-half of one per cent.
1t is true that the Act of 1865 at the time
it was PASSED did not apply 20 Cold Hill.
because that town was then an incorpor-
ated town.
The .tct applied to i class of owns. to-
vac 'AiAN ~ Ath>NA ~ i'H WV Aa'tA
was disincorporated in 1881 by special act
of the Legislature and thereupon became
an unincorporated town. When it became
of that class the Act of 1865 became appli-
e. L. &C. g., ne same as it became applica-
Hi, t, ali towns of that class which have
sl"u up since the passage of that Act
ani incorporated. We are of opinion
that said levy was legally authorized.
The Evidence. The inSut1iciency of the
evidence to justify the verdict of the
jury is one of the grounds on which the
motion for new trial was made. E. D..
Boyle and A. J. McCone were the only
witnesses examined who gave III intelli-
gent opinion as to the value OF the prop
erty in question. These witnesses showed
themselves to be thoroughly familiar
with the property and competent in every
respect to testify to its value. The high
est value in 1895 either of them placed
the property at Was Sl6.50O. We find no
evidence in the record to Justify a higher
valuation, and therefore hold tn the ev-
ideucp does not justify said verdict.
Penalties. Fender. The defendants
rendered to the Tax Collector the sum OF
$779.5O i'll full payment OF all the taxes for
the year 1886, claiming that the same was
in excess of the true amoun due of le-
gal taxes asst ssed upon the true cash
value of defendants property. The ten
der was set up in the answer. To this part
of the answer the plaintiff demur'ed and
moved the court to strike it out. The de-
murrer was sustained and the motion
uruntal nnfpiiantS aXpHntpd and AZ
signed the action of the court as error. In
support of the action of the court the cast
Of the State vs.. Carson Saving Bank, Il
New, lag is cited. IN that case the amount
of the tax assessed against the Bank wa
Sl349.5S. The Bank rendered S66a.O il
full payment. claiming the same to be al
that was legally due. The question il
that case was whether certain bank de
posits were assessable to the Bank. Tht
-. Bank claimed that they were not and ten
n dered the whole tax, except, the amour
assessed on said deposits. This cour
. held that said deposits were properly as
sessed to the Bank. The BauN claimed
it was not liable for the thir:y-hre pc
centum penalties on he amount it hat
rendered. The Court said: THE facts ar
these: There were due one thousand thre
hundred and f%orty-nine dollars md hft.
o cents. Defendant rendered six huudre'
, snd sixty-nine dollars and fifty cents il
y full payment and satisfaction. The ten
der was made on condition that it shOul
g be received in full satisfaction. Certainl
the County Treasurer had no authorit
to receive the money with that conditio
attached. If defendants theory of tn
law had been found correct, the tende
would have been sufficient. But the la'
being otherwise, the tender OF q par
made on condition that it be received fc
- the whole, does not relieve defendar
=, from the payment of the entire pena
ties"
" The court recognized the right Of a ia.
. payer who may be sued for a tax to cor
" test the same on any legal ground. and
- tender the mount he may deem to he i
y gal and proper and if he shall prevail i
- his contention and the court shall fin
that he has rendered the full amour
u properly assessable against him he sha
y not be subject to penalties. In this vie
I we fully concur.
he The Judgment nj order from whic
u the appeal is taken are reversed.
/ The trial court upon a new trial Will a
Il certain the mount of taxes due, based O
V the true cash value of the property
/ hen found, and will determine whetht
the amount of said tender equals or e,
ne ceeds the mount of the taxes, so foun
G. if 80, enter judgment for the taxes will
n out any penalty or costs, if not, emit
Judgment for the taxes and also for IL