Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1903-05-25
RULING OF THE COURT
GOVERNING ASSESSMENTS ANTE
DATING ISSUANCE OF DEEDS.
Held That District Cannot Collect
Taxes Prior to Those for Wn1cn
Property Was Sold.

been issued. The Supreme Court OF the
District in the case of Brewer against the
District held some years ago that the LIS
trict could not collect unpaid taxes lot
years prior to those for which property had
been sold and tax deeds issued. Subsequent
to this decision, however, on October IL
1896 the Commissioners issued an order to
the effect that:
"It is the sense of the board that the
ruling of the Supreme Court of the DISTRICT
of Columbia, in the case OF John II.
Brewer against the District OF Columbia
ct al, Equity 9513. November !, 1856, shouid
not be construed as imposing an obligation
upon the Commissioners to approve claims
involving the principles expressed In that
decision, but that each claim must be sever
ally adjudicated before action thereon by
the District authorities"
On a number of occasions local attorneys
have endeavored to have this order rescind
cd. They argued that 1t was unjust 70
compel their clients to go to the expense
Of equity proceedings merely as a matte. ..s
Of form before the Commissioners would
cancel the taxes covered by the decision OF
the court. Lately the agitation has been
renewed and communications on the subJect
from Messrs. Charles H. Vragin, Ralston q
Siddons and w. Preston Williamson were
referred by the Commissioners to the cor
poration counsel Mr.. A. B. Duvall who IN
an opinion. has reviewed the litigation ana
recommended tno TcNOCdtiOh VI NAS SSAAA
missioners' order above quoted.
Mr.. Duvall's Opinion.
Mr.. Duvall says the attorneys mentioned
represent holders OF tax deeds who. prior
to the passage of the present tax law, pur-
| chased real estate described in said deeds
for default in the payment Of taxes, and
continues:
1.-THE general term of the Supreme Court
6o1,, aT0h
1. 1885, in Brewer agt. District Of Column
bia Mr. Justice Cox delivering the opinion
of the court, held that the grantee In a
tax deed, executed and delivered by the
Commissioners, took the title discharged
of the lien for any unpaid taxes that may
have been assessed against the land for
previous years.
''The same court in Wall agt District
that the tax deed related back to the time
of the sale, and did not extinguish the
right of the District to enforce payment OF
taxes maturing subsequently 10 tne aaoe " %
Columbia agt Hufty. on June 2. 1852 az
| frmed the decision in Brewer ast Dis
trict Of Columbia. ;,
1.-THE effect and operation OF tax deed
executed in accordance with the then ex-
listing law has, therefore, been conclusive
ly established and declared
Notwithstanding the decisions OF the
courts. the Commissioners have uniformly
declined to cancel unpaid taxes assessed
prior to the date Of a tax sale, and nave
required the applicant In each case 10 ME
| his bill in equity. and general order 10
| that effect was passed by the Commission
| ers on October IL. 1895 Several hundred
| bills for the purpose mentioned have been
| hled; in each case formal demurrer is
interposed and decree OF the court Ii
passed canceling the taxes.
Purely Formal Procedure.
1.-THE procedure is purely formal one;
| and. generally, in order to expedite the pro-
ceeding, the decree has been taken without
| COSTS In several instances we have been
| Obliged to contest the question OF costs,
| and some Of the judges have declined to re-
! lease the District from the costs Of the case.
| which are usually decreed In favor OF a
successful complainant; these costs amount
| to $50 or $40, and include the clerks rees
and q taxed attorneys fee.
II do not believe that In this class OF
| cases, where the District has absolutely no
| defense and where it has no right to de-
| mand the unpaid tax assessed prior to the
| date of the tax sale. that 1t should put the
| citizen to the expense of employing counsel
| and paying some ten or more collars as the
court costs.
II am of the opinion that the Commission
| ers would be justified as matter of law and
good administration in canceling such
| taxes upon application of the holder Of the
| tax title or his grantee; and l have the
| honor to suggest that the order Of October
| g. 1896 be revoked, and that in the cases
| under consideration, and In similar cases
| hereafter, the unpaid taxes assessed prior
| to the date of the tax sale on which the
| deed issued be Cancelled upon The tax books
| by order Of the Commissioners
such cases cannot arise under our present
| tax law, fnasmuch as by the act Of Congress
approved February 2s. 1898. no tax deed
| the property sold are paid"
Much Inconvenience Caused
The opinion rendered by Mr.. Duvall was
| referred by the Commissioners to Assessor
| Darneille for his views. Mr.. Darneille says
| the Commissioners order OF October II.
| 1896, requiring each case to be taken to
| the courts, has resulted in considerable
| Inconvenience. delay and expense to those
persons who acquired title to property
| through tax deeds; and in many cases the
District has been charged with the cost
| of such litigation.
1T seems to me-" he continues, that this
| is entirely unnecessary and productive OF
no beneficial results, since the proceedings
| in court as to the cancellation of these
| taxes are purely formal, the District being
| obliged to acQuiesce. On the other hand,
| the resembling Of the order of October II,
1885, and the Issuing Of an order directing
! this Office to cancel upon discovery, taxes
antedating tax sales upon which deeds
| have been executed, would result In ex-
| punging from the records a class of UNI
| COllectaDI0 taxes, anu, IN my OplnlOu,
would in view Of the decision of the court,
| be a matter of simple justice to the prop
| erty owners concerned. whose title is cloud
| ed by the retention of such taxes on the
| records Upon the provisions of the act
| of February % 1898, as amended by the
| act of July /, 1902. all arrears of taxes
| must be paid before execution of tax deed.
1 SO that cases of the kind in question are
| things of the past"
| Mr.. Darneille then recommends that he
| be directed to cancel the arrears involved
The Commissioners have not yet acted
| upon the matter, but, In view of the unan-
| imous opinion expressed in favor of such
4 action, will probably rescind the former
| order and issue a new one. as suggested
| by the assessor.
PLANS FOR FERRY LINE.