Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1901-12-06
SOLDIERS HOME EXEMPTION.
Title in the Wife's Name Does Not In.
validate Exemption.

II NA1l0a10 GxompIionss
4 Centerville, Dec Gin the distric
court, in the case of ELI Ramsey VS.. TIN
i City OF Centerville, application of tn,
i plaintiff to have his homestead ex
empted from taxation, Judge Fee, II
announcing his opinion or ruling said
The plaintiff filed his petition asking
that his homestead be exempted from
taxation, on the ground that he is al
honorat discharged union soldier. ant
unable to perform manual labor, anG
that he Is dependent thereon for the
support of himself and family. Also al.
fltging that the title to his homestead Is
in the name Of his wife.
/ The case comes into this court on ar
appeal from the board Of review OF the
city of Centerville.
THE defendant city filed demurrer
to the petition. and the ground Of the
demurrer is that the petition shows that
the title to the homestead Is in the
plaintiffs wife and therefore not exemp,
from taxation. and that presents the
question for me to pass on.
The legislature passed law, section
1904, paragraph Z, that the homestead,
not to exceed $500 in actual value, OF any
honorably discharged union soldier or
sailor. unable to perform manual labor
and dependent thereon for the support
Of himself and family, shall not be
taxed
THE point made and presented for
my decision has never been passed on
by any court so far as know, and is
entirely new question, and hence am
without any assistance to guide me ex-
cept the language Of the statute and the
object sought to be attained by the leg
islature in enactipg the law.
The homestead right Is a vested,
fixed, determined right, not an inchoate,
contingent or conditional right, as dow
err is. If the deed to the homestead is
in the wife's name she can by no means
independent Of her husband deprive him
of his homestead right. She can not
convey any title to the homestead with
out the husband joins in the same joint
instrument She can not rent the prop
erty and thus deprive him OF his right
to occupy it. Where the title to the
homestead is in the wife, the husband
has the same right OF homestead, the
same right Of occupancy as If the title
was in himself, and when the title is in
the husband the wife has the same right
of homestead as the husband.
In other words, the homestead that
he occupies with his Wife is his home
stead. with all that the word implies in
law, whether the title is in his wife's
name or in his name. and to preserve
that homestead he must pay the taxes
just the same when the title is in his
wife's name as when it is in his own
lame.
1T is said by counsel for defendant
that II you grant this exception then the
wife has an exemption that she could
not herself claim or attain. Grant that
to be true, but that does not stop the
operation of the law. The exemption Is
not granted to her, but to her husband
on his homestead, and he is not to be de-
prived of the benefits Of the law because
the wife is also benefited. Because in
this case the wife occupies the home
stead. his homestead, Jointly with the
husband, does not in my opinion. de-
prive him of the right to have the prop
erty exempted from taxes he may have
to pay and which he Is bound to pay in
order to protect his homestead from tax
sale and thus lose his homestead. 1t is
said the wife is bound to pay the tax
on the homestead: true It is, but the