The evening herald. [volume] (Albuquerque, New Mexico) 1914-1922, 1915-08-07

your aaies are over one hundred
thousand dollars. you Mould make an
application for a license. and remit
the sum OF one hundred and atty doll
lars.
II has been generally stated that
the state has no right to impose an
occupation tax. and that the city
could not legally collect these taxes
from the merchants of the city. 4
have gone into the authorities some
what at length on this proposition. aud
/ nnd that the highest authority IS
to the effect that tho state may. In the
| discretion Of its Legislature. levy n.
tax ON every kind Of property within
iia Jurisdiction. or that II may select
any particular kind Of property and
tax that only. II In the opinion OF the
legislature that course viii be wiser
This scemr 10 have been the purpose
of the tax amendment to tho consli-
tutionadopted by the people az the last
election.
And what is true ~ property Is true
OF occupations aleo. ana there IL no
respectable authority Co contradict
J the statement that the state may tax
: occupations. or Il mag select for tax
alton certain Glasses and leave the
others untaNcd.
Considerations Of general policy de-
termlne what tho selection shah be In
such cases. and there is no r~ostr.c-
ton On the power OF choice imposed
bv the constitution of the state OF
New Mexico upon the legislature.
And while Il has been contcndcd In
this city In my hearing that the state
cannot tax a merchant upon his stock
OF goods. and at the same time impose
upon him an occupation tax.
There is no doubt In my mind that
an occupation tax on merchants Is
hurdeYaomc. and operates unjustly in
this care. because. the state requires
the payment Of the tax On the stock.
and then taxes the anne business as
an occupation. II ! had tho sole say
so. occupation taxes would be icvied
on the business of lawyers. insurance
meH. real estate men. physicians and
men engaged in any business. which
docs not require carrying In stock per-
lfonnl property which b. subject To-
taxation hy the state. But that Is "a
matter which Is In the discretion Of
the legislature. and In this state the
legislature hne expressed ltF dlscrc-
uon very clearly.
The Imposition of an occupation
tax on merchants has been attacked
ON constitutional grounds. and IN
every case the coustitutiouality Of the
legislature has been upheld. The de-
cislon of the courts IL about this:
ITO tax a merchant upon his
stock as property, and also Inn
60. 60. hNM
gross sales. may seem burdens
some. hut II Is not unconstitution-
al, when the people have not seen
~ expressly to void IT,"
This Is substantially the holding Of
the following cases. which | have eX-
amined
W%ashington VS. State. 10 Ark. 75e.
Carson vs.. Forsyth. 80 Ga. GIL,
German Insurance CO., vs.. Louis
vile. "a $. ". Rep.
Springfield vs.. Smith. i3S Mo-. "a.
State W.. Foster. % Il. l. 1913
ogden City vs.. Crosby, ~ Utah SO.
Davis ys. Pctrinohich. ne Ala, G5i.
san Jose vs.. Il. r.. co. 90 Cal. i1b.
Price Va. People 1873 m. IA.
Columbus VIZ. Hartford Insurance
Co.. 90 Neo. SO.
Ex-pnrty VS.. siebonhaur, "A Neb.
2G5,
Winston ys. Tailor. 90 s.. G. 80.
Abrcch vs.. state. Texas APP. 2tG.
These citations are given you not
with tho idea that YOU viii read the
cases, hut simply 90 show you how
many different states have had To
Hrht To uphold the constitutlonality
of an occupation tax, ana how gem
orally II has been upheld.
Further. may interest YOU TO
know that there Be- "a line of authority
which holds that In the case of bus
iness carried on without the payment
Of the occupation tax viii be Illegal
and no recovery can be had upon con-
tract. made lu the curse Of Il. THIS
has bccn held In the case OF
Page vs. state. Ala. Si5.
Alexander VS. idano, AZ Kan. SOS.
Doran VS.. Phillips, a. Mich. 22s.
bancroft w. Davis. "A VI. $50.
In the case Of sellers ys. Phillips
/ 81 M app "a, It was held that an I'M
| licensed attorney could not recover
l for professional services, even though
| such services were rendered under a
1 contract thorofor-this where an oc-
l cupntion tax was required.
I Although II was held in ~ New. 81,
1 that unless the state expressly volds
/ the contracts Of sale made b. persona
! falling 10 pay an occupation tax, such
/ pcrson can recover for goods sold
! without license.
Respectfully submitted,
ISAAC RARTH.