Evening journal., 1901-05-17
Decision Shows Technical
Flaw in Acts Title
MEANS BIG FINANCIAL LOSS
Persons Who Paid Tax Under Protest
Will RecOver-ThOSe Who Did
Not May Fight

y
Court in Banc yesterday afternoon
the Adams tax law is declared uncon-
stitutional. The opinion was supple
mented by the reading of a second ana
a third one. the former being con-
curing one. by Judge Grubb, ana the
latter a dissenting one by Judge Boyce.
The decision was based on technl-
cality the act net setting forth an the
title its intent, the title reading An
act to euualize taxation for State and
county purposes" while the law itself
nrovided that part of the taxes col
ieoted should go TO the city OF Will
mingtOn.
ion:
This is an action in assumpsit, brought
by the Equitable Guarantee and Trust
Company the plaintiff, TO recover from
John p. Donahoe, collector OF taxes for
the Northern district of the city of Will
rningtcn the defendant, certain taxes as
sessed for the years 1898 and 1899 against
the plaintiff. under the provisions Of Chap
ter sSl. Volume 20 OF the Laws of Della
ware passed May 29, 1897, entitled. IAN
Act TO Equalize Taxation for State and
County Purposes" and under the provi-
OF Delaware, approved May 25. 1888, enti-
tied, IAN Act to Amend Chapter SSl. Vol
ume 20 of the Laws of Delaware, entitled
An Act to Equalize Taxation for State
and County Purposes. which said
taxes were paid by the nlaintin under
protest
The plaintiff claims that these acts, col
lectively known as the Adams tax law.
are unconstitutional, null and void for
the following reasons:
First, because neither the title of the
original act Of 1897 CChapter SS1 Volume
2O) nor Of the amending act Of 1898 Chap
ter "a Volume 21). discloses the subject
OF municipal taxation. which is embraced
in the text Of the amending act and is
therefore within the inhibition OF Section
15 Article of the Constitution of 1891
which provides that mo bill or joint reso-
luton. except bills appropriating money
for public purposes. shall embrace more
than cne subject. which shall be expressed
in the title"
Second. because the title Is deceptive
false and misleading; I'm that IL claims to
be an act, Ito equalize" when in fact the
provisions Of the amending act of 1898
produce inequality in taxation; requiring
as it does citizens of rural New Castle
county. to contribute three times as much
for county purposes as is required OF a
citizen of Wilmington.
Third, the plaintiff further claims, that
in any event It must recover the amount
paid as taxes for 1885, because the tax
for that year was not assessed according
to law; in that no opportunity of review
of or appeal from the assessment was
given to the taxable; that he had no day
I'm court
The first inquiry is, does the title dis
close the subject of municipal taxation,
within the scope of Section 16. Article
OF the Constitution of 1897?
The title Of the original act Of 1897 IS
IAN Act to Equalize Taxation for State
and County Purposes"
The text of that act relates TO the as
sessment and collection Of taxes for State
and county purposes. upon all investments
paying interest or yielding an income
which are not now taxed for either STATE
or county purposes or exempt from taxa
tion, and provides that one-fourth Of tn
money so raised in each county shall b.
for the use of the State. and the othe
three-fourths for the use of the county fl
The title Of the amending act of 1895 is
IAN Act to Amend Chapter 31 Volum
20. Laws of Delaware, entitled, An Ac
to Equallze Taxation for State and Count.
Purposes -.
Section Of the latter act provides a
to New Castle county as follows; "rha
of the moneys which shall be levied an
collected under the provisions of this ac
within the limits Of the city of Whining
ton. one-fourth thereof shall be for tn
use of the State and another one-fourt
thereof shall be for the use Of New Cast
county, and the remaining two-fourtf
thereof shall be for the use of the mayo
and Council OF Wilmington %
Thus introducing into the act as amend
ed the subject of municipal taxation. :
SO far as the subject of taxation f.
municipal purposes is concerned, is n
this title open to all of the three obje
tions stated by Judge Cooley; first
tending to log-rolling or omnibus legisl
tion; second. surprise or fraud upon q
Legislature. there being no intimation
this subject; third, giving no fair mott
10 the people of this subject of leglsl
tion?
In addition does not the title negati
the presence OF legislation for munich
purposes, by expressly confning the sec
of the act to be "for State and county pi
poses; and to that extent deceiving a
misleading the Legislature and the pl
pie7
II the title had stopped with the wol
"An Act to Equallze Taxation; a diff
ent question would have been present
In that case, the general subject Of ta'
tion. without any qualification other q
that of equality, would be covered. WI
to these words, however are added
Limitation for State and county p
poses. II becomes the legislative decla
iion that no other than State and cou
taxation are contemplated.
Under a liberal construction Of our C
stitutional provision, II must be manii