Gunter v. City of Jackson

• Decision Date: 02 January 1923
• Docket Number: 22890,22891
• Citation: 130 Miss. 637,94 So. 844
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: GUNTER v. CITY OF JACKSON. CITY OF JACKSON v. GUNTER

94 So. 844

130 Miss. 637

GUNTER v. CITY OF JACKSON.

CITY OF JACKSON v. GUNTER

Nos. 22890, 22891

Supreme Court of Mississippi

January 2, 1923

1 STATUTES. Resort must be had to purpose and intention when meaning not plain.

Where the meaning of a statute is not plain, resort must be had to the real purpose and intention of the legislature in adopting it, which, when ascertained, should be given effect by the court, though the letter of the statute be violated.

2 STATUTES. Unjust or unwise purpose not imputed to legislature.

The court in construing a statute will not impute an unjust or unwise purpose to the legislature, when any other reasonable construction can save it from such imputation.

3 TAXATION. Property and revenues of religious society only exempt when immediately devoted to specified purpose.

Under Code 1906, section 4252 (Hemingway's Code, section 6883) exempting the property and revenues of religious societies from taxation when the revenues are used for fraternal and benevolent purposes, it is only property and revenues primarily and immediately devoted to the specified purposes which are exempted, and if the property and revenues therefrom are primarily invested in trade or business for profit, they are liable to taxes, though the ultimate net income be devoted to the objects mentioned; especially in view of the public policy of the state to restrict the ownership of real and personal property by churches and the exemptions of church property as evidenced by Constitution 1890, sections 269, 270, and Code 1906, section 934 (Hemingway's Code, section 4110).

4. TAXATION. Ordinance providing for taxation of stocks of goods of persons commencing business after February 1st violates requirement of uniformity.

An ordinance, providing for the taxation of stocks of goods of persons commencing business after the 1st day of February of the year in which the tax is imposed, is unconstitutional because in conflict with the provision of the Constitution requiring taxation to be equal and uniform, and assessed under general laws and by uniform rules.

HON. W. H. POTTER, Judge.

APPEAL from circuit court of Hinds county, HON. W. H. POTTER, Judge.

Two actions by the city of Jackson against R. B. Gunter, corresponding secretary treasurer Mississippi Baptist State Convention Board. Judgment in the first action for plaintiff, and defendant appeals, and in the second action for defendant, and the City appeals. Affirmed.

The taxes for 1920 involved in Case No. 22891 were based on an ordinance which was a copy of the statute involved in Reed Bros. v. Board of Sup'rs of Lee County, 126 Miss. 162, 88 So. 504 (Laws 1908, chapter 75; Hemingway's Code, sections 6889, 6890).

Cases affirmed.

George Butler, for appellant.

Green & Green, for appellee.

OPINION

ANDERSON, J.

These two cases have the same parties; there is one question common to both, which is the only question in No. 22890, and upon the solution of which depends the remaining question in No. 22891. The parties are the Baptist Churches of this state represented by R. B. Gunter on the one hand, and the city of Jackson on the other, who for convenience will be referred to respectively as "the Church" and "City." No. 22890 is an appeal by the Church from a judgment of the circuit court of Hinds county against it in favor of the City for taxes alleged to be due the latter by the former for the year 1921 on its stock of merchandise situated in the City of Jackson and known as "Baptist Book Store." And No. 22891 is an appeal by the City from a judgment of said court refusing the City a judgment against the Church for taxes for 1920 on said stock of merchandise at a three-fourths value, the business having been commenced early in, but after the 1st day of February, 1920.

The book store in question is a regular mercantile venture for profit; the income, after paying expenses being constantly reinvested in new merchandise as needed to fill in and build up its stock. The net revenue, however, from the book store is used by the Baptist Churches in the state through the State Baptist Convention to maintain and support their principal church activities, including home missions. The Church claims exemption from all taxes under section 4252, Code 1906 (section 6883, Hemingway's Code); and this is the question common to both cases. That section provides, among other things, that all the property, real and personal, and the revenues derived therefrom, belonging to any religious or charitable society or benevolent order on the lodge system, where no dividends are declared, and where the revenues thereof are used for fraternal and benevolent purposes, shall be exempt from all state, county and municipal taxes. What did the legislature mean by the language in the statute, "and the revenues derived therefrom?" It will be observed that the exemption applies to both the property and the revenue derived therefrom. Did the legislature mean to exempt the property and its first fruits only? Or did it mean to exempt the property and the income therefrom, whether such income be the first fruits, or the net income at the end of stated periods, resulting from repeated investments of capital and income? It is not plain from the language of the statute itself exactly what the legislature meant by the word "revenues." If instead of that word the statute had used the word "income," the contention of the Church would have more force.

This court has repeatedly held that where the meaning of a statute is not plain, resort must be had to the real purpose and intention of the legislature in adopting the statute, which when ascertained, the court should give effect thereto, even though the letter of the statute be violated; that what is within the intention is within the meaning of he statute, though not within the letter, and e converso. Kennington v. Hemingway, 101 Miss. 259, 57 So. 809, 39 L. R. A. (N. S.) 541, Ann. Cas. 1914B 392; Learned v. Corley, 43 Miss. 687; Bonds v. Greer, 56 Miss. 710; Adams v. Y. & M. V. R. Co., 75 Miss. 275, 22 So. 824. And, furthermore the court in construing a statute will not impute an unjust and unwise purpose to the legislature when any other reasonable construction can save it from such imputation. Pattison v. Clingan, 93 Miss. 310, 47 So. 503.

The policy of this state with reference to the ownership of property by religious societies as reflected by the...