Idaho County free press. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho Territory) 1886-current, 1900-01-05
TAX LEVY REDUCED
TEN MILLS.
Opinion by Judge Steele in a
Suit From Idaho County.

In THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF
THE STATE OF IDAHO, IN AND FOR
THE COUNTY OF IDAHO.
j. Alexander and A. Freiden-
rich, partners as Alexander &
Freidenrich, Appellants. VS.. The
Board of County Commissioners of
Idaho County, Idaho, and the
County Of Idaho, Respondents.
1t is insisted in this case that the
manner prescribed by statute of
1899 for collecting taxes for state
purposes is unconstitutional and
void, for the reason that the
method provided is contrary to the
constitution, and that taxes levied
by such procedure will not be
uniform in their application, and
will not fall upon all citizens of
the state in equal proportion, ac-
cording to the valuation of their
property.
The constitution provides that
the legislature shall provide such
revenue as may be needful, by
levying tax by valuation, 50 that
every person shall pay a tax in
proportion to the value of his OF
her property, and that all taxes
shall be uniform upon the same
class of subjects, within the terri
torial limits of the authority levy
ing the tax, and shall be levied and
collected under general laws which
shall prescribe such regulations al
shall secure just valuati ton fol
taxation Of all property, real and
personal, etc.
See Art. VII, Sec. 2 and 5 o
the constitution.
The statutes prior to 1895, pro
vided as follows "There is here
by levied for state purposes upon
all property not exempt by law
from taxation, an annual ad va
loren tax of 80 cents on the one
hundred dollars assessed valua.
ton, ETC."
Since the year 1895, up to anG
including the acts of 1899, the
statutes have read differently, but
all of the last mentioned acts arc
the same, except as to the amount
of money necessary to be raised
and levied by the state.
The statute of 1899 reads as fol.
lows: '"There is hereby levied fol
state purposes, for the years 1896
and 1900 respectively, an annual
ad valorem tax of $4,000 which
shall be paid by the several coun-
ties of this state in the proportion
which their assessed valuation, as
shown by their respective assess.
ment rolls bears for the year mex
preceding that in which said tax
is to be paid, to the total assessed
valuation of this state for the pre-
ceding year"
See Sec. l410 r. S. as amended
at page ACT, Session Laws of 1890
See also Sec. 141O X. S. of 1887.
At the outset, it is we'll tt
observe that every court approach
es with hesitancy the question O
declaring a law unconstitutional
and IN exercising its power so to dc
while doubt exists. Every intend
ment must be given in favor of iii
validity, and before a statute i.
declared void, in whole or in part,
its repugnancy to the constitution
ought to be clear and palpable, and
free from doubt. Practically ~
of the learned asaal,irii.ts who hav.
considered this subject, have, will
--6he voice, declared that it is no.
on slight implication and vagu,
conjecture that the legislature il
to be pronounced to have trans
cended its powers and its acts b,
considered void. The opposition
between the constitution and tn,
law should be such that the cour
has a clear and strong conviction
of their incompatibility with eacl
other. Keeping these views il
mind, we proceed to the examina
ton OF this question.
In the case at bar, no record il
shown as to what demand wal