Evening star., 1901-12-21
Judge Glabaugh's View Of Personal
Tax Law in District.
TEXT OF THE OPINION RENDERED
Collection Barred by the Abolition
of Certain Offices.
VIEW OF THE CASE

sona tax law apply ying to the District is
constitutional. a tax against personal prop
erty cannot be levied. The decision was
in connection with the action for writ of
certforari instituted by the committee Of
the estate of Eugene Peters, lunatic
against the District of Columbia, which
attacked the validity of the personal tax
law. The committee the Goth of last Oc-
tober fled petition in which it was stated
that paper had been received by the
committee from the Commissioners of the
District of Columbia purporting to be an
assessment against the personal assets
comprised in the Peters estate. The value
of the property in question was estimated
amounting to $500. The court was in
formed that the Commissioners were about
to issue process of distraint to seize the
assets in the hands of the committee for
non-payment
1t was contended by the committee that
the statute of 1877 under which the con-
templated action was to be taken was not
in effect; that the officers created under the
statute were not in existence, and that no
officer of the District has authority to col
.lect such assessments. The court was asked
to require the Commissioners to certify to
1t copies of the records relating in any
manner to the assessments alleged to have
been made against the property referred
to. The records were presented in court
and hearing was had upon the questions
raised.
The Judges Opinion.
Justice Clabaugh, in disposing of the mat
ter, held that the District Commissioners,
in abolshing the Offices of three assessors
July l. 1878, destroyed the scheme Of the
act of 1877, thereby rendering it impossible
to enforce a tax against personal property.
The court further held that under an ex-
animation of the statutes there could be
but one conclusion draWn-that no ma
chinery now exists by which may be put in
operation the provisions of the act. Justice
Clabaugh also ruled that inasmuch as the
act of 1877 provided that parties assessed
should have opportunity to be heard before
the board of three assessors created by that
act, and the Commissioners, acting under
alleged authority of the organic act of 1875
had dispensed with the board, no assess
ment could be made or collected In face of
the fact that no such hearing could oe had
The case is far reaching in Its effect and
involves a large amount of revenue. The
District, it is said. will vigorously prosecute
an appeal, noted in open court, from the de-
cision of Justice Clabaugh. During the
hearing the petitioners were represented by
Attorneys Worthington and Head, Lambert
and Baker and Hamilton and Colbert, while
Attorneys A. B. Duvall and E. H. Thomas
represented the District Of Columbia. Ne
Text of the. Decision.
spoke substantially as follows: i t>"
II have examined into this question as
carefully as 1 could since yesterday, and if
/ had any serious doubt about what my
Judgment should be, would not pass upon
the question now. but to my mind the
case is not one difficult of solution, so far
as [ can see.
In 1917 Congress by the act in question,
established a scheme of taxation for the
+ rnl, to urha y1-ac hat
scheme? 1t was, first, that there should be
three assessors appointed in respect to per-
sonal property, and perhaps real estate, as
well. 1t provided that blanks should be pre-
pared and sent out to the people residing in
the District of Columbia. They were to
return these blanks with a list of their
property. When that was done, upon the
receipt of the blank filled out as above
stated, it was the duty of the assessors
or any one of them, thereupon to assess
and value the property. l do not under
stand that the word 'thereupon' in this
connection means at that very moment of
time, because that would. mean an impoS-
sible thing, and would not be consistent in
my judgment. with the remaining parts OF
this act. If it meant at the very moment
of time, it would mean that 5000 persons
might come in with blanks with all char
acter and descriptions Of property, and the
assessor would not have time to ascertain
and determine what particular stock is
worth. what particular bond Is worth. or
furniture is worth, or a thousand other ar
ticles of personal property.
Difficulties In the Way.
'"rhe assessor might not be able to as
certain the value Of this property for
weeks, and yet if this word 'thereupon
meant that the property should be assessed
at the very moment the blanks were re-
ceived it would simply mean that the as
SCISSOR would have to guess at the value
of the property listed and sent to him. and,
therefore, 1 do not believe that any such
Interpretation as that could be placed
upon this language Of the law. In this
connection the word 'thereupon means
thereafter.
I'm the next place the property was as
sessed and then the scheme went on to
give the assessors themselves, or a ma
jority of them, the right to object to the
action of one of their. number. He may
have assessed the property too low, or he
may have assessed 1t too high. 1t Is not
to be presumed that assessors who are to
assess property will assess at an unrea-
sonable rate, or that 1T Is their duty to
make taxation upon the property Of in
dividuals high possible, but il one
of the assessors should happen to assess
the property at too low a rate, a majority
of them could change that rate, and even
If the rate assessed was too high, ma
jorfty Of the board in like manner could
change the assessment. So that the act
gives the right to the ma ajority of the as
SCISSORS to appeal from the decision Of one
of their number. On the other hand a
party who has returned list Of the prop
erty had the right of appeal In distinct
terms from the action Of majority of the
board.
Provisions of 18th Section.
Coming to the 18th section Of the act, the
law says that there shall be three as
SCISSORS appointed, who shall assess the
value Of both real and personal estate. Now
when they have done that the act goes on
to say that the assessor shall sit between
two given dates in the year 1877, from the
first day of September to the first day Of
October, a period of about thirty days;
when they sit at that time. for what pur-
pose Is it? They shall hold daily sessions
for the purpose of hearing and determining
any and all appeals from the valuations
heretofore made by them, not the valua-
ton of real estate alone, there Is nothing
In this section to suggest that their ses-
sions are held to equalize the values OF
real estate alone. 1t Is their duty to as
sess personal property as well as real es-
tate, and when they have SO assessed II
they shall sit for month to hear appeals
from the assessment. and 1t seems incom-
prehensible that the law which requires
them to assess both real and personal prop
-ko