The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-05-23
LAW IS AGAIN HELD VALID
A REHEARING REFUSED IN THE
MORTGAGE DEDUCTION LAW CASE.
Eighty Thousand Taxpayers I'm Indi-
ana Affected ny the Decision-
How the Court stands.

The Supreme Court, in an opinion writ
ten by Judge Gillett, yesterday refused to
grant a rehearing of the mortgage deduc-
ton case Of Martha Lewis ct al. against
Harry B. Smith. auditor of Marion coun-
ty. The court reafirmed its previous opin-
ion. also written by Judge Gillett. that
the mortgage deduction law is valid and
constitutional. This action of the court
will settle the question in favor of about So
600 taxpayers in Indiana who are directly
affected by the courts decision. Mort
gage deductions are claimed on property
amounting to S40GJO,0O0 in value and the
benefit TO the taxpayers in deductions I'M
der the law will not fall far short of $780,
COO.
A short time ago the case was decided in
favor of the constitutionality OF the mort
gage deduction law Three judges of the
court held for the validity of the statute
and two-Judges Bowling and Monks-dis-
sented from the opinion of the majority
Immediately after the decision of the court
Auditor Smith filed a petition and brief for
rehearing. After confederation of the pc
tition and going over the case once more
II was overruled yesterday. IL is the opin-
ion of Attorney General Taylor and others
that the second opinion of Judge Gillett
greatly strengthens the position taken by
the court IN the original opinion. Judge
Gillett sustained his former opinion with
additional reasoning. Judges Bowling and
Monks again dissented without additional
opinions.
Discussing the action of the court, Attor-
ney General Taylor said yesterday: Most
of the counties of Indiana have put these
deduction statements upon their tax dupli-
Gates. In some of these counties the audit
ors have not done so. In the counties
where the auditors have the taxpayers
have already been credited with the amount
of their deductions. In other counties
which. like Marion, acting upon decisions of
trial courts, did not place deduction state
ments upon duplicates the taxpayers will
have TO look to the auditor for refunding
certificates of the amount of the deduc-
tons 10 which they are entitled. These
certificates will be issued by the auditor on
call and will be paid at once when pre-
sented to the county treasurer, just as err
roneous assessments are corrected by the
same official 1t would not be necessary
for the auditor 10 make up new set of
books covering the 1901 assessment; but
these can be made ready for the next
years duplicates. II is estimated that So
coo taxpayers in Indiana are directly af-
fected by this decision. they having filed
certificates for deductions due them on ac-
count of mortgages given them"
Attorney General Taylor has maintained
all along that the law was constitutional
and valid and was largely instrumental In
getting the case in point into the court.
Judge Gillett, in concluding his opinion,
says: While the fact that the result of
the upholding of this law may be to take
millions of dollars worth of property from
the States assessment sheet has caused
us 10 consider this case with great care
yet we cannot strike down the law for
that reason. The question is political in its
character, and. If the act is inimical TO the
interests of the State the argument men,
toned should be addressed TO the General
Assembly"