Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1913-09-18
The Law in the Oyster Case.

In its desire to prevent the utter con-
fusion OF District finances through the
later annulment of the triennial tax as
sessment now in progress consequent
upon a court decision declaring inel1gl-
BILE an assistant assessor on account OF
lack or bona fide legal residence" in the
District at the time of his appointment.
The Star has directed the attention Of the
District Commissioners to the fact that
in certain decisions the Supreme Court
of the United States has declared void
tax assessments participated in by non
qualified officials. No official attention
has been paid to this warning or to the
suggestion Of The Star that the question
of Mr.. oysters eligibility be referred
BY the Commissioners to the corporation
counsel for an opinion. An informal re-
quest that The Star give a specific ref
erence TO these decisions made through
subordinate of the corporation counseIs
office was ignored by The Star as an in
adequate official action in a matter of so
grave Importance. Now comes news
paper demand which. while not in any
sense official. may nevertheless be In
terpreted as indicative of the ncredulity
of the local authorities, and i'm the hope
of inducing action The Star complies
with the request TO point to the decisions
of the Supreme Court which declare that
de facto incumbency by an assessor is
not sufficient ground for valid assess
ment.
In Martin versus Barbour Qf0 L. s..
634l the Supreme Court of the United
States held, regarding the validity of a
tax sale at Arkansas:
1T was proved that the sale was made
contrary to law, because no valid assess
ment for the year 1884 was made, in that
the assessor did not take and subscribe
the oath affirmation prescribed by
section J661 of ManSfields digest.
IL was also shown that such oath was
not Endorsed upon the assessment books
for the year 1884. prior to their delivery
TO the assessor. as provided by section
1851. To permit the sale to the
appellant to be confirmed would be to
assist the state to take advantage of its
own wrong.
Ii this were not enough, the Supreme
Court of the United States has further
held that even where the proper form of
oath was subscribed to by an assessor.
but filed later than the statute required,
the assessment was void. This decision
occurred in Parker versus Overman Us
How, 1870, suit to confirm a tax title
brought in Arkansas and. by reason of
citizenship in another state, removed into
the circuit court of the United States
and appealed, the supreme court hold
ing:
The record shows that Peyton S.
Bethel, the then sheriff of the county of
Dallas, did not file his oath as assessor
on or before the 10th of January, as re-
quired by law. He did file an oath on
the 18th of March. but this was not in
compliance with law, and conferred no
III 90 nV,
tn. contrary. by his neglect to comply
with the law, his office of sheriff became
ipso facto vacated and any assessment
made by him in that year was void, and
could not be the foundation for a legal
sale. The neglect, also. to file his as
sessment and give immediate notice on
the 18th of March. so that the purchaser
might have his appeal at the next county
court, was an irregularity which would
have avoided sale even IL the assess
nent had been legally made. :
The statute makes the time within
which these acts were to be performed
material; and a strict and exact COM
pliance with its requirements is a con-
dition precedent TO the vesting of any
authority in the officer to sell.
I'VE are of opinion, therefore, that the
sale OF the lands of the appellants was
contrary to law and the deed from
Edward NJ. Harris, sheriff and collector
of Dallas county, to William Overman,
set forth and described in the leadings
and exhibits or this case, Is void ana
should be annulled.''
The Star will not enter into an arsu-
ment as to the meaning of these deci-
sions save TO state that there can be no
doubt that the Supreme Court of the
United States would, upon the founda-
tons therein laid, rule that a tax official
not competent through lack Of statutory
eligibility TO qualify assessor could,
even though taking the prescribed oath
under the prescribed conditions, qualify
himself for valid tax assessment. In
both the cases cited the officials whose
assessments were by the Supreme Court
declared void were de facto." Never
thclcss, through mere technical lapses
of procedure their participation in the
assessments sufficed to invalidate them
The Star. again urges that the Com
nissioners refer this matter to the Dis
trict corporation counsel for an opinion
IN the light of the decisions ii has Just
quoted. and also in the light of the stat
ute creating the office of assistant as
Sesor and the decisions OF the courts re-
lating TO bona fide residence in the Dis.
trict OF Columbia.