The Fairmont West Virginian. (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1904-1914, 1905-07-03

SVEN ~ py tne Legislature must ne
taken as tbe true meaning In the con-
struction Of that statute. Unless we
do this, we can not determine the In
tent of the; Legislature We then turn
10 chapter 90 of the Code. providing
for the assessment OF taxes. and we
find sdeanition Of the words ~per-
|sonai property section 40. The def
milton given IN said section Is not
general definition Of the words. but
definition 10 the words las used in tails
chapter and by this dennition tho
words personal property dc not include
the chatteis real. This entire chapter
is devoted to declaring what property
shall be. and how assessed No rule
for the construction OF statutes can be
found which would authorize the court
in adopting the definition found In
section II Of chapter 10 OF the Code
rather than the one given in section
40 Of chapter 20, when constituting the
assessment laws the very chapter in
which tlsis definition Is found and with
reference to which subject II was
adopted by the Legislature. could
not adopt the construction asked by
defendants without violating every
rule upon that subject These sec.
lions are not new. section Il; az chan
ter 20. and section II Of chapter 10 -,
the Code will be found In the Code OF
1865. AT least 100 oillcers. located in
the different counties OF the state. are
engaged in assessing property every
year, and during these thirty.nyc
years that these sections have been in
force. none OF them. so far as have
ever heard, has claimed the chatteis
real were taxable prior to the act OF
1905 which In express terms makes
them taxable. A thing which has been
done In one way only every year for
nearly forty years. by SO many diner
emit people acting In every county or
the State Is quite likely right. IL
wrong some one would have discov-
cred 1t before now. The construction
given to this law by SO many persons.
for such length OF time. md ncu,ii.
esced In by the people, youid Of itself
Justify the court In adopting thei,
construction, In case OF doubt. II ia
not pretended that the Legislature
has ever In express language author
lied the taxation Of chattels real prior
to the act OF 1905. and it is equally
clear to my mind that the Legislature
has never In any statute used words
by which chattels real may be in
cluded as personal property when lin
tied by the definition Of personal prop,
erty adopted by the Legislature 10 be
followed when used In relation to as
sessments. The Legislature has plain
\ lv said wha. things shall lie included
in the words personal property when
used with regard TO assessments and
chattels real are not among the things
named. III am not mistaken In these
views 1t follows. tlaN the contract in
Question, being chattel real. and not
taxable prior to the act OF 1906. IL
would be unlawful for the assessor 10
enter II upon the books for taxation
for any year prior to 1905. The as
SCISSOR may enter for taxation. any
taxable property which may have been
omitted. but not property which was
not taxable at the time. This contract
was not taxable Under any law IN this
Estate prior to the act AZ ions ana
should not be assessed for taxation
prIor IL that times AN axsosrant ~