Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1916-07-11
MINIATURE ALMANAC

being pro bono publico il is my opinion
that they are cumulative remedies and
are therefore not repugnant TO each
other This opinion is strengthened
very materially BY the history of the
egisiation involved.
You will note. ~ reference 70 chap
err 7o5 OF the Acts OF 1896, page 773.
which is the original act creating ex-
aminers OF records, that these last
named officers were directed 70 make a
report of this class OF property to the
commissioners of revenue.
And thereupon such commissioner
of the revenue shall assess the taxes
thereon as If such report was made
by the clerk OF said courts or by fiduci-
aries. as now prescribed by law"
COURT CLERKS REQUIRED
TO FURNISH LISTS OF PROPERTY
II. therefore. the original act was re-
pugnant to the provisions of section
t92. as above set out, after March 4,
1895 tthe date OF the approval OF the
act creating examiners of record it
became the exclusive duty OF examiners
OF records TO report this class of prop
erty. However by an act approved
February "a. 1898. chapter 400, Acts of
1898. page $40, section 432 of the Code.
was amended and re-enacted, and the
clerks of courts were again required
to furnish the commissioner of revenue
list Of this class of property held by
commissioners or receivers under the
authority OF the court.
II, therefore. these acts are repug-
nant, on and after February "a, 1888
the date when section 4so of the Code
came the exclusive duty of the clerks
of the court to report this class of
property to the commissioners of reve-
nue.. However. on March s. 1898. chap
ter TOT. Acts of 1898. page 756, the law
was amended and re-enacted as to the
duties of examiners Of records, and
these officers were again required to
report the aforesaid class of property
to the commissioners Of revenue and
the commissioners OF revenue directed
to enter upon the personal property
books the names Of the persons mkn-
toned in the examiners reports and
the aggregate amount of the property
chargeable to each and extend tho
taxes upon such property "as in tho
case OF other persons and property en-
tered upon such book" II. therefore,
these acts are to be construed as re-
pusnant the exclusive duty was again
imposed upon examiners of records to
report this class of property to tho
commissioners of revenue for assess.
ment.
DUTY OF BOTH CLERK AND
EXAMINER TO MAKE REPORTS
However section 492 OF the Code
was again amended and re-cnacted
December TO- 1903, by an act in force
February !. 1904, Acts OF 1902. 'o3, 'O4,
page 6f3. and the provision as above
set out directing clerks of courts to
report this class Of property 10 the
commissioners of revenue WAS again
re-enacted. And. therefore. if the pro-
visions of these two acts are to be-
construed as repugnant, from March
8. 1898, to February /. 1904, it was
the exclusive duty of the examiners OF
records to report this class OF property
while from February I, 1904, to June
~, 1915, tho date when the acts Of the
last Legislature went in force 1t was
the exclusive duty of clerks Of courts
TO report this class of property.
This statement Of the history OF
these two statutes demonstrates that
to construc them ms repusnant would
clearly violate the intention of tho law.
making body, and am, therefore, con-
firmed In my opinion that tho reme-
dies provided therein for tho ASSESS
ment OF property for taxation are
cumulative. and that 1t is still the
duty OF tho clerk to report such prom
crty to the commissioners Of revenue
FOR assessment. Very truly yours.
(Signed) JOHN GARLAND POLLARD
Attorney General.
LEIGH ISSUES STATEMENT
DENYING EAsLF,Y CHARGES
Attorney Benjamin Watkins Leigh,
Of Houston, yesterday transmitted to