The San Juan islander. [volume] (Friday Harbor, Wash.) 1898-1914, 1903-08-06
AS TO TAX TITLES.
SUPREME COURT MAKES RULING
IN LEM CASES.
1t Upnolds the Spirit of the Law
as Now On the Statute Books.
Opinion Written by Chief JUS
tice and Was Unanimously Con-
CURED In.


Olympia, July 3I-In an opinion
handed down yesterday and written by
Chief Justice Mark A. Fullerton. the
supreme court has established a broad
principle relative to the foreclosure of
tax liens, thereby removing the cloud
which seems to have enveIoped the va
lidity of tax titles in this state. Son
the plainest principles Of equality and
justice, the courts ought to insist that
a showing of injury incapable of being
corrected be made before tax is de-
clared void," is the principle enunciat-
ed in summing up the decision.
The opinion is given In the Thurston
county case of Stella E. Smith, respond
ent, vs.. w. f. Newell ct al, defend
ants, and David Mitchell and wife, APP
pellants.
In the years 1898 and 1894, block 80,
of Sylvester's plat of Olympia, was
owned by one person and was assessed
for each of those years at valuation
exceeding $4,000. On November ID,
1900, the taxes on the block remained
unpaid, and the respondent applied to
the county treasurer for a certificate of
delinquency for taxes due on the east
half of the block. That part had at
that time become the property of DR..
David Mitchell. The county treasurer,
on respondents application, equally
divided the tax levied against the en-
tire block, and issued the certificate for
the east half, but failed to notify by
registered mail the several owners in
terested. Later, Mrs. Smith, the re-
spondent commenced this action to fore
close on the certificate of delinquency.
The appellants contested, questioning
the sutficiency of the procedure, as
we'll as the right, but the respondent
secured judgment. In the appeal to
the supreme court the sufficiency of the
summons and also the, verifcation of
the complaint were attacked. The SUI
preme court holds that even if the OBJ
jections were we'll taken, it is not avail
able in such a case, as the merits of the
controversy are not affected.
The principal contention was that
the certificate Of delinquency sought to
be foreclosed was void through failure
of the county treasurer to notify the
parties interested by registered letter.
But the court points out that the same
law that makes such notice necessary
gives the court power to correct just
such omissions. No injury. was done
the appellant by any of the irregular
tiles, and the court refused to act on
am of the technicalities. In summing
up the case the opinion announces the
following doctrine, which is bound to
not only add to the force of tax titles,
but to lessen as we'll the disposition to
wait for some other person to pay the
taxes and then come in and claim that
they have been paid:
Takes Broad Ground.
'But why may not the proceedings
be sustained on broader grounds? The
state has power to levy the tax origin
ally and power to more specifically APP
portion it after it is levied. By its final
action it has charged the land with no
more than its just share of the public
tax. 1t has violated no constitutional
right of appellants. Before declaring
the lien of the tax irrevocable, it has
given them their day in court, where
they had the opportunity to dispute ev-
cry question going to the right and pow
er of the state to charge the property
with the tax. Despite this opportuni-
ty, it has not been shown that the prop
erty has been charged with single dol
lar that it ought not in justice to be
charged with. Surely where these con-
ditions appear, the courts ought not to
declare the tax void because of the mere
omission of ministerial officer to per
form statutory duty. When a tax is
declared void the effect is always to re-
lease certain property of it's just proper
ton of the public taxes and unjustly
increase that of other property. On
the plainest principles of equality and
Justice. therefore, the courts ought to
insist that showing that injury inca
pable of being corrected has been don't
before ouch declaration be made. We
think the judgment should be affirmed.
and it is so ordered.
The entire court concurs in the opin-
ion.