Allen v. Harford County Com'rs
| Decision Date | 16 June 1891 |
| Citation | 22 A. 398,74 Md. 294 |
| Parties | ALLEN ET UX. v. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF HARFORD COUNTY ET AL. |
| Court | Maryland Court of Appeals |
Appeal from circuit court, Harford county, in equity.
Action by Edward M. Allen, in his own right, and as trustee of Sallie E. Allen, his wife, and Sallie E. Allen, against the county commission of Harford county and others, to enjoin the collection of taxes. Judgment for defendants. Plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.
Argued before ALVEY, C.J., and MILLER, IRVING, BRYAN, ROBINSON MCSHERRY, and FOWLER, JJ.
Frederick R. Williams, for appellants.
William Young and Geo. L. Van Bibber, for appellees.
The appellant Edward M. Allen, as trustee of his wife, is the owner of a farm in Harford county, which is assessed for taxation on the assessment books of that county at $8,320. This farm is incumbered with mortgage liens amounting to $16,250. At the proper time the appellant applied to the county commissioners to have the whole of said assessment abated, because of said mortgage liens, but his application was refused. In default of the payment of the state and county taxes for 1887 and 1889, said farm, or a portion of it, was about to be sold to enforce the payment of said taxes, whereupon the appellant applied to the circuit court for an injunction. His application was refused, and hence this appeal. The only question raised here, or intended to be raised, is whether real estate which is mortgaged should be assessed and taxed at its actual assessed value without regard to the mortgage liens, or whether the amount of such liens should be first deducted from the assessed value in order to ascertain the taxable value. The appellant contends he is entitled to the deduction mentioned, and he bases his contention upon the fifteenth article of the bill of rights of the constitution of Maryland, which provides, among other things, that "every person in the state, or person holding property therein, ought to contribute his proportion of public taxes for the support of the government, according to his actual worth in real or personal property." If this were a new question, its importance would demand a full consideration and discussion; but it has been definitely settled by our predecessors in the cases known as the "Tax Cases," under the act of 1841, reported in 12 Gill & J. 117, in which, without delivering an opinion, the rulings of the lower court, refusing the deductions and abatements now claimed, was affirmed. One of these appeals was that of the late George M. Gill. It appeared from the record in his case that...
To continue reading
Request your trial