Shotwell v. Louisville, New Orleans & Texas Railway Co.

69 Miss. 541
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 15, 1891
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 69 Miss. 541 (Shotwell v. Louisville, New Orleans & Texas Railway Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Shotwell v. Louisville, New Orleans & Texas Railway Co., 69 Miss. 541 (Mich. 1891).

Opinion

Campbell, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The title acquired by the levee board of district No. 1, by the sale for taxes on January 11,1872, and the conveyance in pursuance thereof, was a valid one as averred by the bill and maintained by the evidence. This title was vested in the state by virtue of the thirteenth section of “An act to abolish the office of liquidating levee commissioner,” etc., approved April 11, 1876. Laws, p. '166. The state had the right to abolish the levee board of district No. 1, as it did by the act for that purpose, approved April 11, 1876 (Laws, p. 174), and to substitute, as that act does, the auditor and treasurer for commissioners, secretary and treasurer of the levee board, and to substitute the collector of state and county taxes for the collector of levee district No. 1. The acts mentioned are to be construed together, as if they were one. Although the last-mentioned act was specifically to abolish the levee board and substitute other officers for those formerly existing, and continue the operations of the act of 1871, which created the levee district No. 1, for the purpose of paying the debts of said board, the first act mentioned deals with lands held then by the levee board of district No. 1, under any sale for taxes, and provides for their redemption at any time prior to November 1,1876, and, if not redeemed, for their sale by the auditor of public accounts, at any time before January 1, 1878. An act approved February 1, 1877 (Laws, p. 22), extended the time for redemption one year; and, by an act, entitled “An act to extend certain provisions of an act, entitled ‘An act to abolish the office,’ ” etc. (the act first named in this opinion); approved March 1, 1878 (Laws, p. 241), all the lands mentioned in said act were declared salable to any person, upon the terms named in certain see[555]*555tions of the act, by the officer authorized to sell, who was the auditor of public accounts; and, when the twelve years for which taxes were levied on lands in levee district No. 1 had expired, the act approved March 5, 1884 (Laws, p. 184), was passed, whereby the act of March 17, 1871, which created the levee board of district No. 1, was repealed, the district abolished, and the arrangement, by the act of April 11,1876, whereby the auditor and treasurer were substituted for the formerly existing board of commissioners, was swept away forever. But, by this act the auditor, who, by the former acts mentioned, was empowered to sell the lands in district No. 1, which were held April 11, 1876, by the board of that district, was authorized to receive in payment for such lands sold by him (or redeemed) the bonds and coupons of said former levee board, to the extent of levee taxes then due and unpaid to March 17, 1888. , It is thus seen that, on March 17, 1871, the legislature created levee district No. 1, and provided for a board of commissioners, a secretary, treasurer, engineer and collector of taxes; and the act levied taxes on. all lands embraced, and provided for their collection, and for their sale for non-payment, and for them to be sold and conveyed to the treasurer of the board for its use, if not purchased by some one who should bid the assessment due and fifteen per cent, damages and costs. The right to redeem in two years was secured. Power to sell at private sale, at a fixed price, was given to the treasurer of the levee boai’d, and, if not sold by the treasurer or redeemed as provided, the lands were to vest in the treasurer, and become a part of said levee fund, and be sold “as said board of levee commissioners may order.” See § IS of said act. By § 24 of the act it is declared that state and county taxes on lands purchased by the treasurer of the levee board were not remitted or released, but only suspended as to collection, while the lands should be held as assets of said board. So the board held the land thus acquired, burdened with state and county taxes assessed upon' them when acquired or afterwards, which were to be [556]*556accounted for by said board, when the lands were purchased or redeemed.

The board of commissioners provided for was authorized to incur debts, and, specifically, to issue one million of dollars of bonds, and, for the payment of these bonds and other liabilities incurred, the charges and assessments fixed, levied and made as aforesaid by the eighth section of the act (a specific tax on every acre of land) were “ constituted a special fund and trust” for such payment; and said charges and assessments were declared not to be “ subject to repeal, alteration or suspension during the time for which they are fixed, levied and made as aforesaid, until all the bonds, obligations and liabilities of said board shall be first paid; ” and the right was given to the holder of any bond or obligation of said board, after it was due, to apply for mandamus or appointment of special commissioners to collect the charges and assessments imposed by the act on the lands. The fund specifically pledged to creditors of the board consisted of the tax imposed on land by the act, and that was declared not subject to repeal, alteration or suspension, as against creditors. That was their security, and the collection and application of money from that source was the remedy provided for them. These taxes were levied annually for twelve years, commencing with the date of the act, March 17, 1871, and during that period they were to be available for creditors beyond the power of “ repeal, alteration, or suspension,” until all liabilities of the board should be discharged.

It is true that land struck off to the treasurer at a sale for taxes due the levee board, and not redeemed, was declared in § 13 to be a part of the levee fund, and subject to sale as the board should order; but this was not pledged to creditors, as were the taxes, and there was no declaration that the provision on this subject was irrepealable, and it was repealable by the legislature at pleasure, by virtue of the right of repeal of any charter, reserved to the legislature by the last sentence of art. 5, p. 292, of the code of 1857, then in force. Not only [557]*557were these lands vested in the levee board by purchase for taxes when no other person would bid the sum due, not specifically devoted to the claims of creditors, for whom a different security was provided, as seen, but they were to be held by the hoard, charged with state and county taxes, to be accounted for by the board, with interest, when purchased or redeemed, which renders it quite certain that creditors could not regard this provision as of value to them, as probably it was not, for there is no reason to believe that there could be realized from this source any thing beyond the levee taxes imposed. The lands were redeemable upon payment of the taxes, damages and cost, and the levee treasurer was authorized to sell, if he could get the cost, to the board, with accruing taxes, costs and ten per cent, per annum, and the board, after the time for redemption, might sell for less, but was accountable for state and county taxes.

From all this, it is apparent that the provision for vesting the lauds purchased for taxes in the board was simply ás a means to secure the “ charges and assessments ” imposed by the eighth section of the act, which constituted a “ trust-fund” for creditors. That could not be impaired ; but it was competent for the state to change the officials to administer the trust, and to divest the title of the lands as to the levee board and vest it in itself, in the way in which it was done by the thirteenth section of the act of April 11, 1876, cited above.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Burroughs Land Co. v. Murphy
95 So. 515 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1923)
Means v. Haley
86 Miss. 557 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1905)
State v. Woodruff
83 Miss. 111 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1903)
Forsdick v. Board of Mississippi Levee Commissioners
76 Miss. 859 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1899)
Louisville, New Orleans & Texas Railway Co. v. Buford
73 Miss. 494 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1895)
Columbus Insurance & Banking Co. v. First National Bank
73 Miss. 96 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
69 Miss. 541, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shotwell-v-louisville-new-orleans-texas-railway-co-miss-1891.