Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1913-09-20
Is MI. Oyster Eligible ?

I'll. Jaw ia the state III Arkansas pro-
i,les that officers acting in the assess
,n~nt of property FOR taxation must take
= certain form of oath and must HE
that oath within certain time. The
supreme Court of the United States has
in two cases ruled that assessments par
tcipated in by officials who failed to
meet these requirements were void and
that property could not lawfully be sold
for nou-payment of taxes thus assessed.
Notwithstanding that the assessing Off
,ials were de facto" in the exercise of
al their functions throughout their terms
IT office
The law in the District of Columbia
provides that To become an assistant as
zessor Il man must have been for five
Years prior 10 his appointment bona
tide resident of the District An assist
ant assessor who Is not bona tide resi-
dent of the District stands with refer
ence to the law in the matter of validity
OF assessments participated in by him
precisely as did the two Arkansas off,
cials whose assessments were invali-
dated by the United states Supreme
Court because. although otherwise eligi-
Bile. they failed technically 10 qualify.
Ii j. an axiom Of the Law that the
Official who is not legally qualified to take
an oath through lack OF bona fide resi-
dence'' cannot qualify himself by taking
tn, proper oath.
As to the attitude Of the United States
sup. eme Court in the case of Mr.. oyster
and the validity of his assessment of
property. no ono has a right to make
any definite statement. The court alone
can frame its own decisions. But the
court is always guided BY principles,
which may have been defined in prior rul
ings and the only prior rulings in matters
Of assessment validity indicate that the
court holds to a rigid compliance with
the statutes in all details regarding taxa
tion. That it would regard initial in
eligibility as disqualification equally
with failure to observe the technical rou-
tine of oath-taking and oath-filnS pro-
cedure is not only fair but vertically
an unavoidable conclusion.
However that may be, The Star insists
that the District Commissioners should
avoid all risk of assessment invalidation
and settle as definitely as possible with
out delay the question of Mr.. oysters
eligibility. If he is by competent au-
thorty declared not TO be bona fide
resident within the language of the
statute his appointment is invalid and
another man must be named. If he is by
such an authority pronounced eligible to
hold this Office the Commissioners are
justified In retaining him In his position.
Why not, then, call for an authoritative
opinion on this question? Why wait until
some tax-resisting property owner raises
the issue in court?
The Star is in no way or degree inter-
sted in Mr.. Kalbfus, and is not calling
attention TO the statutes and the deci-
sions in the hope OF seeing him restored
10 Office. AS matter of fact, it has not
the slightest concern in his case. 1t is,
however. keenly interested to see the law
respected by the Commissioners and the
validity OF the tax assessments insured.
1t views as possibly unfortunate the OBJ
vious disqualification of Mr.. oyster from
holding an Office which he is by reason Of
long study OF the subject of taxation
qualified TO fill. Nevertheless there
stands the law which as to this particu-
lar position requires bona fide residence
in the District: there stands the fact that
Mr.. oyster Is and has for many years
been voter i'll Pennsylvania; there stand
the decisions Of the District courts. un
reversed By higher authority, to the effect
that man who votes in a state cannot
at the same time be bona fide resi-
dent of the District"
The statute may be unfair in thus spec
flying five years bona tide residence" as
condition of qualification as assistant
assessor. The rulings OF the courts that
voting IN state bars u man from such
District resident may be severe. But
there they are and while they re-
Enain unchanged they govern the ease
2nd it i tho duty of the Commissioners
10 respect them, however great may be
the loss 10 the District in the matter of
any individuals services.
The sta repeats the question which lies
II the root of this case. the question
y hich the Commissioners should refer
Tor answer 10 the corporation counsel,
the officer designated by law 10 ad-
Nise the Commissioners in the inter-
tetation and observance Of the statutes:
- Edward W. Oyster eligible under
the law to hold the ONCE OF q member
~ the hoard of permanent assessors
he t.tr Set nf GAu,