Martinsburg herald. [volume] (Martinsburg, W. Va.) 1881-1920, 1907-03-09
LIMITING COUNTY LEuES
Statute IS Declared to be Uncon-
stitutional,
DECISION is FAR REACHING
If Sustained, 1t Kills Tax Laws-suit
Was Against Sheriff Of kanawha
County.

Charleston. March Judge Bur-
dett rendered his decision upon the
opening OF the circuit court in the
mandamus case of the state of West
Virginia. at the relation of the ha-
nawha Banking & Trust company
against John ]. Melton, sheriff or
Kanawha county. This is case Of
great public interest and the decision
is one Of far reaching effect, inasmuch
as II is decision in favor of the
plaintiff and one, which if sustained
bv the supreme court annuls the pres
ent law limiting county levies, and the
one passed at the late regular session
of the legislature which becomes a law
next June. which limits county leyies
to 85 cents on the 500 valuation with
which to pay such outstanding indebt-
edness.
The Trust company's Side.
The Kanawha Banking & Trust
company held lot of county orders
announcing with interest to s2,534.42.
There were twenty-eight Of these or
ders. one of them was issued in 1897.
one In 1902. Four in 1903. Nineteen
Of them in 1904 Two Of them in
1905. and one in 1906. The Trust COM
many owes state, county and district
taxes for the year 1906, amounting to
80 532. 80. and it rendered to the sheriff
the county orders above mentioned in
pavment of said taxes, but he offered
to permit the Trust company to pay
one-third of its taxes with these or,
ders if it would pay the balance in
cash. The Trust company refused TO
do this, but instituted this suit in man
damus to compel the sheriff to receive
these county orders in payment Of its
taxes. and to compel him TO deliver up
to it its tax receipts for the year 1906.
This action is based upon section Is
of chapter IL of the code.
The County's Side.
The county court Of Kanawha coun-
ty fled its petition and was made a
party to the proceeding, and it filed its
answer in which it claimed that none
of the said orders, excepting one,
which was payable out of the levy of
1906, is payable out of the levy OF
1906, and that the sheriff has no right
to pay said old orders, but should de-
vote the levy of 1906 to the payment
of orders drawn during the year Of
1906 on said levy. And ii further says
that in making it's levy for the year
of 1906, it did not include anything to
pay the outstanding county orders.
Court Held For Plaintiff.
Plaintiff demurred to these answers
and returns and claimed that they
we're insufficient and after full argr.
ment, the court sustained the plain
tiff's demurrer, holds the answers are
insufficient and awards a peremptory
mandamus, commands the sheriff to
receive these county orders in pay
ment of taxes of the Trust company
and to deliver up to its its tax re
ceipts for 1905. 1t was argued on be
half of the county court that it is au-
thorized to lay and disburse county
levies, and that it has the right there
fore to direct the sheriff not to pay
the old orders but to devote the levy
to the current expenses of the pres
ent year.
On behalf of the sheriff it was ar
gued that If he is compelled to take
county orders in payment of taxes,
both state, county and district, prac-
tically the whole of such state, coun-
ty and district taxes will be paid in
county orders, and that he will receive
no money to pay into the state treas
ury and to pay over to the districts as
he is required to do by law, and may
be subjected to suits on his bonds for
failure to pay over the state taxes as
required.
Limiting Unconstitutional.
On behalf of the Trust company it
was argued that the statute is man.
uaSOi IL has UCCA III lOiCG III VII
ginia and West Virginia since 1881
1t was intended to make county orders
legal tender in payment OF taxes,
and that it amounts to a contract be.
tween the state, county and district on
the one side and the holders of the
county orders on the other; that no
subsequent legislation can impair the
obligation of this contract and take
away the legal tender quality of these
county orders without violating the
constitution of the United States; that
the county court has full power and
is required by the statute in making
up its estimate for the county levy
each year not only to provide for cur
rent eXnpnSps but also IN rrovida for