The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1906-04-01

1,CratiOn court OF tne 4Cotpuo.. 49, - Ii y
~ the fir.t cd dny u FEBRUARY Of ths
second year after such nssessncf,tt atlu
| not after, Sto have tile aAsesstr1ent o. hih
| ilnnds and lots correoted,' and that ~
was the purpose OF the Legislature IN
passing the curative act to prevent per- PEI,
sons aggrieved from having q juu Y ~
hearing ns to tho assessments OF tne u
| 'lots and that conseuuently SAD &C. 10, o.
tenth amendment to the Constitution
| Of Tie United states, but 1t IL exceedingly
doubtf Ewlether this curative act ls
| yolatve OF the fourteenth amendment g,
| 10 the Constitution OF the United Statos
or 10 section 1Gof the Constitution OF
poses OF Tits decision that SO mitch OF
! tho act as depttves the land or lot owner
| OF this privilege Ii unconstitutional 10
by9no ,neans follows that i, all other
respects the act Ia not valid and cons
stitutionnl. ;i a. q (, s. g N
ForIif tllis section Of tho curative act
| is held to be unconJ titutlonal. then there s
approved March 10. 1904, amending and
re.cnacting section ~ Of the Code OF
| Virginia, and tbs construction is In ems
|stire harmony with what must have boon
1.-The Intention of tho Legisln tire OF Viz
ginia II, passing the curative act, which
was to validate Ill assessments, etc.,
under act December IT, 1909, which leaves
to the parties nggrlcved until Fo 10. L
| 1907, when read In connect Ion WI tn nmend-
l5ment or March IL, 1904, to sock redress
| from any real or supposed erroneous as
| sessment Of their lands or lots 81
New Fork Case Cited.
In the Exchange Bank Tax Cases, IN
| the case OF Williams vs.. Bonrd OF super.
lfvlsors OF the county OF Albany, It was
! held BY Wallace. judge in speaking OF
an net which sought retrospectively to
sanction proceedings In the assessment
or d. tax such as they could have legitl-
lsnntcly sanctioned in advance:
"The general rulo has often beer. de-|
| clared that the legislature may valldate
retrospcctivcly any proceedings which
| they may have authorized IN advance;
md IL Is Immaterial that such legislation
may opernte to divest m Individual OF q
bright OF action existing In his IA vor, OF
subject him to a liability which did not.
exist originally. In a large class OF cases
this Is the paramount object, OF such
legisa ton on n. !, ia
Legislature to provide for tho collection
of d tax by a system which REQUIRES the
8taxpnyers to pay in advance OF an ops
portunity to DO heard, but permits them
to have d subsequent hearing and to OBJ
tain restitution. f5restltution5 ought TO pc
mado, the validating act was constitu-
ticnnl.
7 shall not notice the defense set up by
the commissioner OF the revenue, y. -
Hawkins, In his answer, that even though
tho act OF December ~, 1903, should DO
void and invalid, and the ass ossments
made by the commissioners In the city
OF Richmond, therefore,, invalid as hay
Ing been done under this act, and even
though the curative act Of Mnrch u,
1906 should be void and held not TO
validate the assessments and acts done
hereunder, yet that tho said assessments
would be valid under the law as 1t stood
prior to the passage Of the act OF De-
Gambler 10. 1908, when read IN connection
with section ], OF the schedule Of the
Constitution OF Virginia, which reads as
follows: i55Ss II zt 5E5
"section /. The common law and the
stntuc laws In force at the time this Con-
stitution goes into effect. 40 far. as not
repugnant thereto, or repealed thereby,
shall remain in force until they expire
by their own Limitation, or are altered
or repealed by the General Assembly" 3ss
This question I leave open, as being un-.
necessary for me to decide. for the rea-5
sons heretofore given, which impels me
TO dismiss the bill OF complainants In
this cause and deny the relief prayed for
Why Concession Was Made.
IT will be observed that I have treated
under the influence OF the order entered
In the case OF Lambert VS.. Smith, 81 Va,
| 2s. quoted supra, tho not OF December 10.
1908, as invalid because violatve OF section
| s OF the Constitution OF Virginia.
1T was stated in the argument Of this
case that the general appropriation bill
passed by the Legislature on March II,
| 1904 contained n provision to pay tho
| costs of assessment Of lands and lots,
! SIS, co., or so much thereof as may be
necessary. which provision is found on
page 1873 OF the acts of General Assem- ply,
| 1904 but as to what effect. II any, this
will have upon tho validity OF the act Of
! March 10. 1903 forbear to express an
| opnion, or to dincrentlnte House bill No.
$50 from this act, which was q bill to
provide for the appointment of commits
sioners Of valuation and defining their
duties. which. BY order In tho case Of
Lambert vs.. Smith. supra. was held to
be invalid as approprlatlng public money.
have not alluded to the contention OF
the complainants that the act OF :. O.
center TO- 1908, was void because 1t
Imposed or revived tax and did not
got the constitutional vote required, be-
cause for the sake OF tho argument and
for the purposes Of this decision under
tho influence OF Lambert VS.. Smith, os. Yir-
ginin conceded tho invalidity OF the
act-as being an appropriation Of public
noney-for these reasons and these only
do / make this concession.
There is a we'll recognized distinction
between assessment of property for the
purposes of taxation and the actual Inn
position or revival OF n tax. An analysis
OF this provision in section 20 OF the
Constitution convlnces me that tho words,
Imposes. continues or revlves a tax"
when read In connection with the next
succeeding clause, Every law imposing,
continuing or revIyine a tax shall spc-
officially state such tax aud no law shall
be construed as to stating such tax,
which requires reference to any other
law or any other tax, lido not
embrace laws passed for tho as
sessment of property for the purposes
OF taxation, either personal or real.
II regret that could not give a moro
exhaustive examination OF the authors
ties bearing upon tho interesting and far
reaching questions presented for my de-
cisIon III this case, An order will TO
a., orod diam issinr tho hill 1of the com.