The Tupelo journal., 1917-07-20
JUDGE TIM COOPER ON
THE EQUALIZATION ACT
Act Was Legally Passed Says
The Judge.

iuS IildC al OplIliOH VI commentary
from such a well grounded, clear
thinking lawyer as Judge Tim E.
Cooper, formerly chief justice of the
Mississippi Supreme Court, and
now resident in Memphis, relative to
the state tax equalization act of 1916
would command confidence, the state
tax commission requested a public
expression from him in regard to
that act. Responding to this request,
Judge Cooper wrote Chairman
Thompson the following Illuminating
opinion, which sustains the ground
taken and followed by that official
body:
d. L. Thompson, Esq, Chairman
Tax Commission, Jackson, Miss.
Dear Sir-In response to your re-
quest, and believing l am performing
a public duty, l write to say that if
the press, as well as the boards of
supervisors and the people would
carefully read the decision of the su-
preme court in the case of Forman
VS.. Wheatley, the evils intended to
be cured, the remedy provided and
the result to be reached would be
clear. Our constitution in simple
and unambiguous words declares
that taxes shall be assessed upon all
property listed at the full value I'M
der uniform rule prescribed by gen.
eral law. This plain mandate of our
organic law we all know has been
habitually violated by people and of
fcers. 1t may be confidently assert
ed that in no single instance have
these provisions been enforced in any
county in the state. Different per-
centages of valuation have been
adopted in the counties with the re-
suit that some counties pay many
times more state taxes than do 9th
ers. The report of your commission
shows clearly a great diversity of
valuation of property in the various
counties.
This evil had become so serious
that chapter 90 of the laws of 1916
was enacted to cure OIL greatly re-
strict the practice which had pre-
vailed of permitting the separate
boards of supervisors to finally fix
the valuation of property. 1t may be
difficult and require time for the
commissioners to cure this long ex-
listing and widespread evil, but that
it must be cured is manifest. The
statute prescribes the duties to be
performed by the commission, and |
fail to see how any opponent of the
act al seriously contend that it is
the duty of the commission to vio-
late it's oath of office and to dis-re-
gard the clear provisions of the sta
tute. Whatever opinion may be
held as to whether the act ought or
ought not to have been passed, it
has been and there is nothing left,
as it seems to me, except for the
commission to proceed in the dis
charge OF us QuCfeS.
1t is manifest that only three con-
ditions can continue: First, to have
many percentages of valuation for
property throughout the state; or
second, to have one fixed standard,
being less than that prescribed by
the constitution; or third, to follow
as nearly as many be the mandate of
the constitution. 1t would seem that
there can be no doubt as to what
course should be pursued. If by rea-
son of the increased valuation of
property the state levy shall become
exhorbant, there is no remedy ex-
cept by special session of the Legis-
lature.
Court Decision Cited.
In conversation with you, you call
ed my attention to that clause in the
opinion Of the court by which it is
said: "In doing this the board has
no authority to increase the assess
ment Of any property above that
placed by n or more OF the nigh
est assessed counties of the state"
and l understand that the board con-
strues this language to mean that
property cannot be assessed above
the highest absolute valuation plac-
ed upon it by some county. / do
not think this is the proper construc-
ton of the opinion. 1t is a familiar
rule that the language Of the court is
to be construed in reference to the
subject matter under discussion.
Values are either absolute or rela-
tive. To Illustrate: Lands which
are worth $500 an acre may be as
sessed at $3.50 per acre. This is a
SO per cent assessment.
Lands that are worth 500 may be