The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1915-10-21
NINTH WARDERs NOT EXEMPT
Men VINO Would Avoid Payment Are
Advised That the Supreme Court Has
Declared Kenosha Ordinance Valid
and That Taxes Can Be Collected.

Judge John G.. Slater, city attorney
for the city has answered the question
+" What is taxable dog?o He has
answered it in letter sent to j. Ed
Smith who declined to pay dog tax
and against whom the attorney had
been instructed by the city officials to
bring an action in the municipal court.
Judge Slater decided in effect that ev-
cry dog that Wags its tail within the
corporate limits Of the city is subject
to the dog tax. What is more he as
serts that there is no hope for any dog
owner to successfully contest the pay
ment of the license on account of the
fact that a dog tax ordinance identical
with the ordinance now in force in the
city of Kenosha has been passed on by
the supreme court and declared valid.
In his letter to Mr.. Smith the city at
torney declares that he had been adj
vised that Smith had taken out no
dog tax license on account of the fact
that he resided In the ninth ward. Then
he hurries to inform Mr. Smith that
the place of residence cuts no figure as
to the obligation to pay the dog tax
and that all people in the city are ex-
pected to pay. The city attorney goes
at length into the claims of people in
the newly annexed territory and de-
clares that the dog tax must be paid
by these people the same as any others
in the city. He holds that the city
council has no power to rebate dog
tax any more than any other tax and
that the fact that some of the aldermen
had suggested that this tax be not paid
by the people in the territory until they
had received substantial benefits from
the city was not in keeping with the
property Interpretation of the law. He
informs Mr. Smith that so Far as he
knows people in this territory paid dog
tax last year. He cites the case of
one Brown who refused to pay last
year but who after arrest changed his
mind and paid the tax.
In concluding Mr.. Slater says: eff
you care to test the law that is another
proposition, but 1 want to advise you
that this identical law has been tested
and carried to the supreme court from
the city of Fond du Lac and the SUI
preme court decided that the license
must be paid. And the Fond du Lac
is Identical, almost word for word with
our ordinance"
The police are adverse to making ar
rests in connection with the collection
of the dog tax and it is thought that
this opinion of the city attorney in con-
nection with the Smith dog will furn-
ish precedent which will make further
proceedings in court unnecessary.
Probably twenty-five people in the
city have announced that they are I'M
willing to comply with the law. There
may be others in this same class before
the police complete the work of collect
ing the license fees but fortified with
the opinion of the city attorney it is
thought that the work of making the
collections will be more easy. The city
attorney has found numerous decisions
by which the right Of the city to tax
dogs has been upheld by the higher
courts of the state.
There is evidently no getting away
from the tax and the dog owners who
are wise have not sought to evade the
payment.