The sun. (Wilmington, Del.) 1897-19??, 1901-05-17
ADAMS TAX LAW is
UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Court in Banc Rendered Decision Yesterda,
Afternoon.
|uDGE LORE READS MAJORITY OPINION


adopted.
"rhird, to fairly apprise the people
through such publication of legislative
proceeding as is usually made of the
subjects of legislation that are being con
sidered. in order that they may have an
opportunity Of being heard thereon by
petition or otherwise If they shall so
desire"
So far as the subject of taxation for
municipal purposes is concerned. is not
this title open to all of the three OBJ
ections as stated by Judge Cooley?
First. as tending to log rolling or
omnibus legislation; second surprise or
fraud upon the legislature. there be no
intimation Of this subject: third, giving
no fair notice 70 the people of this sub
icct Of legislation.
In addition, does not the title negative
the presence of legislation for municipal
purposes. by expressly confining the
scope of the act to he "for State and
county purposes" and to that extent de-
cciving and misleading the Legislature
md the people.
If the title had stopped with the words
IAN act to cGualizc taxation. different
""'N'i"h """"' i'"'' ''t', l"'Hth'eu' III
mat case the general subject OF taxation
without any qnaliticatlon other than that
Of equality would he covered. When to
these words however, are added the
limitations for State and county nur
noses." Il becomes the legislative declara-
tion that no other than State and county
taxation are contemplated
In Montgomery Building and Loan As
'ociation VS.. Kohlison ~ aio ~ this
whole subJect Us very amy dlScuSSeu anu
his clear rule laid down:
rms question must always nc Whcther
taking from the title the subject. we can
ina anything IN me hlll which cannon
no referred to that subject. " we DO
the law embraces subject not described
~ the title.
lie referred 70 the cases OF Hewiskiy
thorough VS.. state l6S L. ~. lo' ana
LYMAN vs.. State - lenh. ios. IN tne
latter case IT was decided that a statute
rrohibifory sales OF iiH"or 10 drunken
husbands was unconstitutional ana Void
# enacted either as an ofiGinai OF
'mehd'" ac,' "hu'r w '"l'.", "" ~.
20 prevent the sale, giving or delivering
id'or to mlnorsh
The Judge says: IN me case OF 'he
mayor ana 'onncii of NnoNNu" w.
lewis, IL Tea rlrnn., iSo' me supreme
CONT of Tennessee seem 10 nave ue-
'ided the precise question N thls case
1t held law 10 he nhcohS''''ti"n,''
which was entitled an act 10 provide
more Just ana eq,litahe laws ior t'ie ~
cssment and collection OF revenue io'
state and county nnrnoses' eye, hecanSe
N the text of the law provision was
made for the collection of municipal tax
while no reference is made IN the titie:
Judge Lore said under section : "I .n'
amending act of 1898. section j? OF the
riginnl act is oXnresslv rcnrateh ay 'hcsP
words. "amend the said chanter by strik-
'nc ont all OF section thereof 'ief'
he legislature has specifically ana eN,
mcsslv repealed section " which " hh',
he power TO do. This left the Original
yet without any sectlon y anu y Wy
nhstitute thereon provh'eo ny '"e ',.l.n'',
'ng act he nnconst''u'io''''l ,'nr "i'Sa I.,,t.
'tatntc hns no section u ana 'he S.n'u.'
's amended is emascnlate" 10 '""' eN'
tent.
Tie said: Courts nave never a'.cin"''"
20 saw what legislature wo"n i",'
lone. If i had anticinhted that INC sup,
stitute would nrove to he "nconstitnlionn
Unless the LEGISLATURE mas rn''riN rN'i.s.
| y US ,hteh' y, ~ ,a,auat;on 4, ~,
ns snnS'ah'i"'i, :" oe, .,,o I, ,,o,,, soc
| 'mending ac,. 'i,',' III '",, III .hor
,on or pnrt s,'",n" w, '" n
"" old shonin s'"in' :. oo,,,s :,
| In case o, rN',eSS .r n.;o, o,I,, no
Ne settien ,hht w ~ a;,,u Ss.. oo+ !,
"'inH w." ~, ;,,a,,d;nc tho reneolinf
"ans ...fana no or;c;no, oct
''"S'' "n'. .4 oa,o5
WIS NV ~ y. y. 49,. tho Io,;s,o+uro bo,
~ w 'aH, =" - -. ~ oId soot;o,
h'n eAp.eH"s' ~. =, >,s ~ NON
y ana ,nSrT, , :" .,.;,.;r. @ o,,t VOC ,v;tb;,
"r'io' z. .a,;d ona Ala section i;
- o,,t Nov section 70 was be
-, ;,s ,,n,,,or and unconstitutional ant
II .,a.afaro n
y" ., ~. Al,
| Ihe 1nhge sass we '" ..,;,,e ,a for !;
Legislature uid ii'ehu " n,,iNo
was said so eNpreSSf. l"e ~
provided SUBSTITUTE p". .na.
omission only aS ~ ,.e s"ps'. 70 ~ ..a;i,
ioes NOT anect ,h' ,',r,"nh " -, "a: ~ a.
ing out VINO ca, teii wn" ".n -.