Bd. Of Sup'rs v. Mcgruder

• Decision Date: 03 May 1888
• Citation: 84 Va. 828,6 S.E. 232
• Parties: Board of Sup'rs v. McGruder.
• Court: Virginia Supreme Court

6 S.E. 232

(84 Va. 828)

Board of Sup'rs

v.McGruder.

Court of Appeals of Virginia.

May 3, 1888.

1. Taxation—Delinquent Tax-Lists—Supplemental Lists—Powers of Supervisors.

In Virginia the board of supervisors of a county has no authority to certify amended and supplemental delinquent tax-returns by a treasurer.

2. Same—Constitutional Law—Titles of Laws.

Act Va. Nov. 27, 1884, entitled "An act to allow further time for the treasurer of Henrico county to make returns of delinquent taxes, " etc., providing that the late treasurer of Henrico county shall be allowed additional time in which to make supplementary returns for delinquent taxes, is repugnant to Const. Va. art. 5, § 15, which ordains that " no law shall embrace more than one subject, which shall be expressed in its title."

Error to circuit court, Henrico county.

Error to a judgment of the circuit court of Henrico county, brought by the board of supervisors of Henrico county against William McGruder.

Edmund Waddill, Jr., for appellants.

Guy & Gilliam, for appellees.

Lewis, J. This is a writ of error to a judgment of the circuit court of Henrico county affirming a judgment of the county court of said county awarding a mandamus to compel the appellants "to certify, in the manner prescribed by law, the supplemental returns of delinquent taxes" for the years 1879, 1880, 1881, 1882, and 1883, presented to them on the 17th of January, 1885, by the defendant in error, William M. McGruder, late treasurer of the said county. Upon the filing of the petition for the writ in the county court, the board of supervisors, the appellants here, appeared, and demurred to the petition, and also answered. The grounds of defense were these: First, that the petitioner did not allege and show that the said lists had been duly sworn to and posted, as required by law, before the same were presented to the board; second, that the said lists were not made out as required by law, duly sworn to, and certified by the proper commissioners of the revenue, as was apparent upon the face of the petition, etc.; third, that, for the very years for which the above-mentioned returns were proposed to be made, the respondents had duly certified, at the instance of the petitioner, the said McGruder, his delinquent returns, by which act they had exhausted their powers on that subject; fourth, that there was no law by which amended and supplemental delinquent returns could be made; fifth, that the act approved November 27, 1884, (Acts 1884, Extra Sess., p. 124,) under which said returns were proposed to be made, was unconstitutional and void; and, if not, it conferred no authority upon the respondents to act in the premises, or in any way provided how such proposed amended returns could be made, and that it did not, under any circumstances, apply to lists that had been theretofore presented and rejected; and, sixth, that, apart from the foregoing objections, the respondents had in fact met, and considered the aforesaid returns, and refused to certify the same; that this action on their part was final and conclusive, and could not be reviewed by any court whatever, —it being the exercise of the discretion reposed in them by law, and not to be controlled by mandamus. The defense, however, was overruled, and the writ awarded by a judgment entered on the 4th day of February, 1885; and, this judgment being subsequently affirmed by the said circuit court, the respondent obtained a writ of error and supersedeas from one of the judges of this court.

We are of opinion that the judgment is erroneous. The powers of a board of supervisors of a county are limited and defined by law, and cannot be transcended. Their acts, to be valid, must therefore be founded upon the au-thority of law, either constitutional or statutory; and beyond the limits of their powers they cannot be made to go. It is for the legislature, not the courts, to prescribe those limits; and we concur in the view expressed in the answer of the appellants to the petition, filed in the county court, that there is no law in Virginia by which a board of supervisors may certify amended and supplemental delinquent returns by a treasurer. The statute makes it the duty of a treasurer, as soon as practicable after the 15th of June in each year, to make out the delinquent tax-lists in his county or corporation; and further provides that, before being presented to the county or corporation court, as the case may be, they must be presented to the proper commissioner or commissioners of the revenue for a written opinion touching the propriety of such lists, verified by oath, and they...