Every evening, Wilmington daily commercial., 1922-05-11
THURSDAY. MAY 10. 1899.
LIT THE COURT DECIDE.

LET THE COURT DECIDE.
We have no doubt the letter of |
Taxpayer" printed elsewhere I'm this /
issuc. critioisins the opinion given by
FORMER Attorney General Herbert II. |
Ward to state Tax Commissioner Jes- |
ter, to tho effect that the Ming tax
fec OF three dollars cannot he coll !
once NJ the time the law was enacted.
win be- read with interest Ivy NIL tax
paving citizens. n win be accepted
hv them "a somewhat cinarlSable II
certain public officials. paid by the
S,ata. ara 90 he exempt from the pro-
visions of a tax-imrosing law which
is supposed 10 apply 90 all citizens
ALIKE save those who are especially
cited by tho law as exempt by rca-
sun ~ Indulgence w insanity.
NV. Ward prepared this opinion at
tho request ~ Attorney General
Townsend. who. a- an of',cial included
m tho assumed exemption. naturally
felt n would be indcucste for him
90 pass ofncially uron the question.
Rut even u he had given the opinion.
reaching the same conclusion as Mr..
Ward set forth. there IN no doubt gem
~rsl exception would have been noted.
Naturally. much weight will be at-
tschcd 10 LOCAL opinion rendered by
edsed capacity md hise professional
standing. hut stili tho mind of the av-
craGe c,tissn will incline TO resent a
construction Of constitutional law
which sets ssidc certain public on
c'rle AZ a favored class 20 he exempt
from the payment OF a certain tax
which all other citizens are required
90 pay under tho threat Of severe
penalties for default. II the law pro-
vid'ns for fling tax had especially
and particularly specified this OK
omrtion. therr 8. no doubt there would
have been a raucous howl against its
Injustice. and against its legality by
reason of It's undouhted element Of
class legislation.
Ther~ IL no doubt that from one
point % view. The payment of this NJ
ms tax ny State Official in Office al
tho time % its enactment would have
operated Go reduce HIS salary and
omolumonts." which is In contraven-
tion of a provision of the State Con
s,itu'ion which says; mo law shall
extend the term % any public officer
or diminish his salary or emoluments
after his election or appointment
suppose the Legislature should enact
law imposins special tax on Of
or some other commodity. the result
~ which would Increase the living ex
pen.cs Of a State official and thereh,
eat into his salary or emoluments
would he be exempt from meetin,
this sdded burden.
However. we have no Intention q
entering upon n discussion Of IN
legal points involved in this question
as the average newspaper would hav
eirht chance IN such controvers.
with an experienced and capable law
yer. We only desire TO emphasize IN
contention raised by our correspond
cn,, which 20 us seems sound an
practical. and no doubt will be In
dor~~d by thousands Of those citizen
who. willingly or unwillingly. hav
pni6 this tax. They cannot under
stand why certain State official
should he exempt from payment. an
ccrtainly they will fail 10 see right q
justice IN the exemption.
We do not believe. however. stat
Tax Commissioner Jester should r,
main content with this purely pro
fessional opinion and accept IL az III
undouhtcd construction OF the law.
would be better for him 20 insist upo
the collection of the tax from sue
State officials as have not paid---a
though 4, Is possible most of the
have paid without pro,est-and
they resist payment. institute procee,
mgs and have the matter brought b
fOre the court for a judicial dete
ninsiion. That would settle the ma
tsr for all time. or during the life
Ne law. and might have an importai
BEARING upon the subject OF taxati,
and tax exemption in general.