City of Laurel v. Weems

• Decision Date: 06 November 1911
• Docket Number: 15151
• Citation: 56 So. 451,100 Miss. 335
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: CITY OF LAUREL v. A. J. WEEMS

56 So. 451

100 Miss. 335

CITY OF LAUREL v. A. J. WEEMS

No. 15151

Supreme Court of Mississippi

November 6, 1911

Appeal from the chancery court of Jones county, HON. SAM. WHITMAN JR., Chancellor

Suit by A. J. Weems against the city of Laurel. From a judgment for complainant, defendant appeals.

The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court.

Reversed.

May &amp Sanders and R. E. Halsell, for appellant.

Henry Hilbun, for appellee.

On the 20th day of March, 1906, Eastman-Gardner & Company, by general warranty deed conveyed to the city of Laurel Mississippi, the property in controversy, lot 10, in block 1 of the Alpha addition to the town of Laurel, Mississippi.

Having conveyed this property after the first day of February, 1906, a lien attached to this property for the taxes due thereon for the year 1906, regardless of the fact that the property of the vendee is exempt from taxation.

Sections 4255 and 4257, Mississippi Code, 1906: "Taxes which by law operate as a lien on property from the first day of February in each year constitutes a liability from that date, although the amount is not fixed until the levy is made in September following." Vicksburg Waterworks Company v. Vicksburg Water Supply Company, 80 Miss. 68. This is also held in Wilderberger v. Shaw, 74 Miss. 442.

"Under Code 1892, section 3744, paragraph (e) and Laws of 1900, chapter 50, page 52, exempting from taxation property owned by a religious society, and used for religious purposes after a lien for the taxes for the then current year has attached, is acquired, subject to, and not exempt for such lien, and a sale thereof for such taxes will be valid." McHenry Baptist Church v. John G. McNeal, 86 Miss. 22.

"Land sold after a lien has attached for duly assessed taxes is not released from liability for such taxes by the fact that it is sold to a corporation, the property of which is exempt from taxation." City of Philadelphia v. Penn. Institution, 6 A. & E. Gas, page 437.

McWillie & Thompson, for appellee.

There was a dedication and a conveyance by Eastman, Gardner & Company to this the city of Laurel, but the same was made and executed March 20, 1906. The deed itself is not shown of record, but its date is stated and its execution as of that date pleaded both in the bill and the answer. We mention this fact at this point in our argument in order, once for all, to dispose of it by saying that it was executed after the taxes for which the land in suit was sold had become a lien upon it. The lien attached, Code 1906, section 4255, Code 1892, section 3746, February 1, 1906, and therefore the passing of the title to the city after that date did not exempt it from the tax sale. This point is conclusively settled in our client's favor by this court. McHenry Baptist Church v. McNeal, 86 Miss. 22.

OPINION

MAYES, C. J.

In July, 1909, A. J. Weems filed this bill in the chancery court of Jones county against the city of Laurel and all others claiming any legal or equitable interest in lot 10, block 1, of Alpha addition to the town of Laurel. The complainant seeks by the bill to quiet and confirm his alleged title to the above lot. The lot is within the corporate limits of the city of Laurel, and claimed by the city to be owned by it. Complainant deraigns his title from the government down to a tax title purchased by him at a tax collector's sale on March 4, 1907. The record shows that the property formerly belonged to Eastman, Gardner & Co., and appears to have been owned by them on the 1st day of February, 1906, though assessed for taxation in the year 1906 to unknown. On the 20th day of March, 1906, Eastman, Gardner & Co. conveyed the lot, by warranty deed to the city of Laurel. On May 17th following the deed was recorded by the city in the office of the chancery clerk of Jones county. The tax for 1906 was not paid, and on the 4th day of March, 1907, the lot was sold for the unpaid tax, and purchased by A. J. Weems. It appears that the property is owned by the city as an alleyway.

For the purpose of deciding this case, it may be conceded that after the lot was sold for taxes the collector made the list required by section 4333, Code of 1906, and filed same with the clerk of the chancery court, which was duly recorded by him, and that the clerk, within ninety days and less than sixty prior to the expiration of the time for redemption, issued the notice required by the above statute and had same served on the mayor of the city, and that no attention seems to have been given to the notice by the mayor, and that at the time of filing this bill there had been no redemption of the lot by the city, and more than two years had passed. In defense of the suit the city raises a great many questions; but we discuss only the one which, in our judgment, settles the litigation. The trial court held the tax title valid, and confirmed the title of complainant against the city, and from this judgment an appeal is prosecuted by the city to this court.

The chief contention of appellee is that by virtue of section 4255, Code of 1906, the lien for taxes attached to the property on the 1st day of February, 1906, while the property was the subject of private ownership and liable to taxes, and that when the taxes were ascertained and became due it related back to the 1st day of February, 1906, and did not abate when the city purchased the same. The case of McHenry Baptist Church v. McNeal, 86 Miss. 22, 38 So. 195, is relied upon as conclusive of this contention. Under section 4251, par. "c," "all property, real or personal, belonging to this state, or to any county, levee board or municipal corporation," is exempt from taxation. Under the same section we find that the state has granted exemption from taxation to many other persons, religious societies, educational institutions, etc. For instance, exemption from taxation is given all cemeteries, property of the United States, property of religious or charitable institutions, property of colleges or institutions for the education of youth, property occupied by trustees for the use of public schools, property of hospitals and charitable institutions, etc. All exemptions granted from taxation proceed from reasons of public policy, but the public policy involved is not always the same in regard to each exemption granted. The reason why the state exempts the property of religious societies, charitable institutions, schools, colleges, etc., is because of the interest which the public has in the work which these institutions are engaged in and the public good accomplished by them. The exemption of such institution is a mere grace or charity on the part of the state, in recognition of its appreciation of their public usefulness. The exemption granted to the property of the United States may be said to be compulsory. The state has not the power to levy a tax on property belonging to the United States.

The exemption of the property of a municipality is founded on...