Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1906-01-24
The Tax-Collector,s Status.

Inc saN-t ollectOr status
The disposition by Justice Strout
last Thursday in ordering non suit
pro forna (Which was afterwards
modified by agreement OF court and
counsel by sending the case 20 the law
court on agreed statement in the case
of Bresuahan vs.. MaloDey is of I'M
usual interest to the citizens of Ellis
worth.
In the case in question Mr.. Bresna-
han, to whom was given the uncol-
lected tax levy OF 1904, brought suit
against Mrs. Maloney for her tax OF
chat year. Counsel for the defense
asked that the plaintiff be non suited
on the ground that MIR. Bresnahan is
not legally qualified as collector for
1894, the municipal officers having
no authority to accept the resignation
of the collector for that year, MIR.
Trip, on the grounds he offered.
Other points of law involved are %
even if plaintiff were the legal collec-
tor he could not bring suit within eight
months from the time this tax was
committed to him; (2) the descriptions
ct the several pieces of property were
insufficient, and (3) even if they were
Sufficient the plaintiff cannot main
tain lien against one piece of prop
,erty for the entire amount OF the tax,
which in this case covered several
pieces.
The court stated that it was his i'm
preston that Mr.. Bresnahan's election
was unauthorized, and suggested that
the question be reported to the law
court, which, as stated above, was
4nally done.
This disposition of the case does
mot, of course, mean that this defend
ant, among other citizens whose tax
In unpaid, is aosolved from paying it
ultimately. 1t simply means that
decision from the law court will deter
= mine the status of the collector. For
: many years 1t has been the custom of
= our municipal officers to deal rather
1U4XC4LlN Nlha CSilCCbOkss dCSCptiA,
from them all they could collect, and
turning the uncollected balances over
20 special collector.
Ii happens that the present city
government, appalled, at the legacy
of uncollected taxes bequeathed it by
its predecessors, courageously under
took the task of reducing the amount
thereof, and in its zeal may have in
terpreted the law relating to eollec-
tors rather literally. But it appears
that in the case now in question The
following are the facts: Mr.. Trip,
the collector for 1904, returned TO the
assessors his uncollected tax bills and
his warrant, and refused TO collect any
more taxes.
Thereupon Mr. Bresnahan was
chosen collector, and those uncol-
lected bills were duly committed to
him. Experienced attorneys with
whom we have talked express the
opinion that the action of the city in
electing Mr.. Bresnahan was entirely
legal; that when the old collector re-
fused longer to serve, and returned
his warrant and unsolicited bills, the
city not only had nothing else to do,
but also had perfect right to elect
his successor-ah of which seems to
be good common sense IL not good
law.
If, however, it turns out that this
action viii not hold good in law, the
equity in the case still holds, and de-
hnquent taxpayers, while they may
succeed in embarrassing the city Of
fcials, will not find tax lodging an
easy matter.
That city Of the size and import
ance of Ellsworth should have nearly
$50, 600 of uncoliecssd taxes on i,s
books is not to its credit. This state
of things is due more to unwillingness
ON the part Of officials to embarrass
their friends and neighbors by forcing
! payment than from ignorance of or
disregard for the law.
There is point beyond which pa
thence ceases to be virtue, and the
present agitation 10 likely to result in
some drastic efforts to bring recalci-