Brownsville herald. [volume] (Brownsville, Tex.) 1910-current, 1931-10-09
IL
kalR1
TEXAS TOPICS

Another sl01 900 to be the credi.
OF the fee investigating committee.
That much money will be sought
for the state treasury, by action %
get 1t back from officials and former
officials holding 1t illegally.
A check by senate fee inveStiga-
dred felony indictments, in which
the cases were reduced to INSIDE
meanor grade. the fees fixed by law
for felonies were collected by the
various county and district officers
from the state, while as misdemeanor
cases should have been levied as
costs against the defendants.
A toal of about S108,00 in such
illegal collections from the treasury
was found. Out OF 1t, less than $500
had been returned to the state.
Now probably so civil actions
against officers and their bondsmen,
and against former officers or their
estates, likely will be possible, though
the extent TO which the possibility
OF criminal action might cause re-
funds TO be made may be consider
able.
Besides the Statutory effect Of serv-
ing notice to those supposed TO EN-
force the law that they also must
obey 1t. the monetary savings from
the committees work this year
would run the entire legislature for
an entire four-month regular ses-
sion.
A commentary upon the labyrin-
thine fee system and its corrosive
abuses. was that the new Travis
county grand jury stopped after a
few indictments Of public officers
and said that if all the cases present.
ed 10 ~ resulted in indictments it
would swamp the court docket ana
again compound costs and fees to
where Justice would be overpald,"
even in the retributive prosecution
by the state itself OF charges that
its officers had trampled down the
laws they were sworn TO uphold.
The legislature was told that its
gesture OF cutting sl25,G0 off the fee
funds Of the judiciary appropria-
ton was an empty gesture !. III un-
spent. the amount would revert to
the treasury: but IL claims upon 1t
exceeded the smaller amount, then
the sums would be paid out anyway
and some future legislature would
have 70 foot the bill, the lawmakers
were told.
Explanations OF the ruling that
the tax moratorium law Is void were
made Friday by Atty. Gen. James v.
Alfred. who wrote the ruling, and
Compt. George H. Sheppard, to
whom IL was sent.
Compt. Sheppard told members Of
the house he had not asked for H.;
that he did not agree with Alfred
that the law Is worthless, and tina.
while he will be compelled to follow
1t until the courts act. he will force
a court test at the earliest oppor-
tunity.
Atty. Gen. Alfred in a written
statement said his ruling erroneous
ly had been credited with holding
the legislature could not defer the
payment of taxes.
We made no such holding. and
u opinion does not deal with the
question Of the legislatures right TO
provide split tax payments Mr.
Alfred wrote.
What We did hold was that there
IN a serious doubt as to the right CT
the legislature to remit interest and
penalties on all past taxes up TO
such interest and penalties are part
OF the tax and are secured by liens"
Rep. Z. M. Barron, author OF the
bill. waving interest. and penalties
On all past taxes up TO next Jan. 81.
insisted that the law was passed
under the calamity section Of the
constitution, and that the courts
would not go behind the statement
OF facts recited by the legislature"
He cited the Hidalgo county de-
cision, and said other court decisions
would sustain the law.
Mr.. Barron argued that when
Compt. Sheppard, gets the law in
court 1T will be the constitutional
duty of the attorney general to req
resent the department in an efforl
to uphold the law"