The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1898-03-20


person. The opinion held by the at
tCrney general is that the law under
which such attachments have hereto
fore been made is unconstitutional, and
the state auditor has been advised ac-
cordingly. However, the attorney gen
erals opinion does not directly state
that remittances of county, city and
district school taxes to the persons
named can be validity made. but the
presumption is that the law authorizing
such reTnittances is likewise repugnant
to the spirit of the state constitution.
Assuming that the attorney generals
view is correct, the only way in which
relief TO worthy irnDecunious persons
from payment of their taxes can be
safely accomplished, is by a constitu-
tional amendment, but relief in. this di
rection would not be available for three
years yet.
SOME APPARENT INCONSISTENT
CIES.
Last fall similar question was pro-
pounded to the attorney general by
one of the county boards of eduaIiZa-
ton, and the states attorney then eX-
pressed the same opinion as now. State
Auditor Richards was moved to seek
specific advice on this same
point by noting how some
of the counties have made
apparently wholesale remittances in
1897 OF state and state school taxes to
infirm, insane and INDECENT persons.
For instance, out of a total of state and
state school taxes approximating $780,
600 in Salt Lake county, only 81, 1855
made I'D the aggregate of the taxes
RENTED to the worthy poor. These
figures, compared with Utah county's,
$69,65S of taxes and S1,S56 of remit
tances; Cache county, $4,000 in tax
collections, and 1919 in attachments: San
Pete, S31, 1888 of collectable, and $647 re-
mitted; Weber, $685. less 1868 abated;
Juab, $4,000, with 1921 of state taxes
RENTED to its poor, and Millard's So
1884 of taxes to collect, with with remit
tances. amounting to S16375, make a
showing that for disproportion and in
consistency is simply astounding. The
total remittances charged to the state
and state school funds by the several
counties on account of the 1897 tax col
lections aggregate s7,93S.O7, as COM
pared with $5,666.21 of county taxes re-
mitted to the poor. Undoubtedly the
more wealthy and more populous coun-
ties have a larger number of INDECENT
taxpayers. relatively, than counties of
less population and wealth, but the
practice seems to have been to make
more attachments in the latter class of
counties than in the others Particu-
lariy is this true of Salt Lake county
and Utah county. The state suffers
from these rank Determinations.
THE STATE AUDITOR SEEKS AID
VICE.
So much for the unconstitutional law
as applied. Now as to the legality of
these attachments. On Thursday State
Auditor Richards addressed the follow
N 70 4
Bishop:
In the light of section 8, article Is,
of the state constitution, is section
2,579 of the revised statutes, comforting
on the board of county commissioners
the power to remit or abate the taxes
of any insane. idiotic, infirm or .ndi-
gent person to an amount not to ex-
coed SO for any current year, valid
enactment?
IF said provision of law is deemed
unconstitutional. would it be expected
of me as the state auditor, to refuse |
to allow credit against the state and
state school taxes on account of such
remitta2ces? ''
THE ATTORNEY GENERALS OPIN-
ION.
For reply. Attorney General Bishop
yesterday submitted the following opin- !
ion:
The question involved turns wholly |
on the constitutionality of the follow !
ing language, found in section 2.579 of !
the revised statutes of Utah of 1898: !
The board may remit or abate the |
taxes of any insane, idiotic, infrm or
INDECENT person TO an amount not ex-
ceeding SO for the current year"
That the same is unconstitutional I |
think will clearly appear from a care |
full examination of the constitution |
herein set out, viz:
Section 2 of article Is provides "AIl /
in the state not exempt under |
the laws of the United States or under /
this constitution, shall be taxed in pro- /
portion to its value, to be ascertained as
provided by law
Sec. 3. The legislature shall provide |
by law a uniform and equal rate of |
assessment and taxation on all property /
n the state, according to its value in !
money. and shall prescribe by general /
aw such regulations as shall secure a |
Just valuation for taxation of all prop
erty. so that every person and corpo- /
'ation shall pay a tax in proportion to
he value of his, her or it's property.
Provided, further, that the
of the United States, of the
state. counties, cities. towns, school dis
riots, municipal corporations and pub
ic libraries. lots with buildings thereon
Ised exclusively for either religious
or charitable purposes. and
places of burial not held or used for
private or corporate benefit shall be
exempt from taxation"
The provisions of section % of article
of the constitution makes the follow
ng provisions mandatory, the intention
If which is clearly expressed and the
language free of any ambiguity.
1t will be observed that the constitu-
ion provides that all property in the
tate now exempt under the laws of the
United States or under this cons titution.
hall be taxed in proportion to its value
lnder a uniform and equal rate of as
essment and taxation. so that every
person and corporation shall pay taxes
n proportion to the value of their prop
rty. The property exempt under the
constitution is expressly named therein
[ was competent for the constitutional
convention TO make these exceptions.
tut in doing so it intended all other
property not so mentioned should come
within the general rule and be subject
o taxation.
Therefore, unless we can find in the
PROVISIONS of the constitution an ex-
mption of such property in express
erms. the. property of insane. idiotic,
nfirm or INDECENT persons would be
ubject to taxation to the same extent
nd in the same manner as property
elonging to other persons. No such ex-
mption is to be found in the constitu-
ion.
The effect of the act of the legisla-
ure attempting to grant this power to
he county boards of equalization is to