Macon beacon. [volume] (Macon, Miss.) 1859-1995, 1910-01-21
AGRI'L HIGH SCHOOL.
Non-LiabiIity of County for Taxes Not
Paid Under Protest.
The Attorney General Renders an Opin-
ion to the Board of Supervisors
of Noxubee County.

Jackson, Miss Jan. 19, 10
Board of Supervisors of Noxubee Co,
Gentlemen-In response to your
verbal inquiry through your Mr..
E. d. Cavett, as to my opinion
relative to the right of parties,
who have paid taxes required by
chapter 1O2, Laws of 1908, know
as the Agricultural High School
Bill, lately declared uncOnstitu-
tional by the supreme court of the
State of Mississippi, to recover
the taxes collected under this un
constitutional Act, [ am of the
opinion that unless the taxes, now
in the county treasures, collected
under this unconstitutional Act,
were paid under protest, or the
party paying raised some objec-
tion, at the time of making pay
ment, to the payment, on the
ground that the law was illegal
which authorized the collection,
the taxes cannot be recovered
from the counties, by the parties
paying them:
Adams VS.. Saunders, 80 Miss, 778;
Walter VS.. Mills, 48 L. R. A. SOB;
Tuttle VS.. Everett, 81 Miss, 27;
miss. Rep, Reprint, 25, 81, 24);
Vicksburg VS. But ler, SO Miss. 1856.
Jackson VS.. Newman.
In the case of Jackson VS.. New
man, supra, the tax collector of
the City Of Jackson collected a
privilege tax from one Newman
which was not authorized by law.
1t is shown in that case that the
tax collector demanded the pay
ment of the tax and threatened to
levy upon the defendants hack
and team unless the tax was paid.
Newman protested against the
payment of the tax, but upon the
ground that it was eXhOrbitant,
and not upon the ground that it
was illegal and that the collection
unauthorized. He afterwards
sued for the recovery of the tax
erroneously collected, which the
court declared to allow refunded,
holding that the payment was
voluntary, and could not be re-
covered.
In the case of Vicksburg VS..
Butler, supra, the court said:
''If the parties are upon an
equality, neither party having the
advantage of the other, a pay
ment is voluntary unless there is
some application of force Or
threats, which mrkes the act COM
pulsOry.
But if the party demanding the
money is the officer clothed with
authority to enforce payment,
the parties are not on equal terms,
and there need not be the appli-
cation Of physical force, or
threats which constrain the con-
duct of the party.
If the collector of taxes is cloth
ed with authority under the law.
at the time he demands the money
from the taxpayer, to enforce pay
ment by the arrest of the person
or distress of property, and an IL
legal tax is paid to avoid the one
or the other, and the payer
brings to the notice of the collec
tor, in any mode, that the tax is
illegal, or that it is objected to for
that reason, such payment is
clearly compulsory payment. It
is not necessary for the payer to
wait until his person has been ar
rested, or his property seized, be-
fore he makes the payment. He
may anticipate the extreme course
that the officer is compelled by
his authority to take, and pay to
avoid that alternative. That
disposes of this case''.
This case shows that the party
must call the attention of the au-
thOrities to the fact that the mon.
ey is being illegally collected.