Llano Cattle Co. v. Faught

• Decision Date: 21 October 1887
• Citation: 5 S.W. 494
• Parties: LLANO CATTLE CO. v. FAUGHT.
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

5 S.W. 494

LLANO CATTLE CO. v. FAUGHT.

Supreme Court of Texas.

October 21, 1887.

Appeal from district court, Scurry county; J. V. COCKRELL, Judge.

Pendleton, Chapman & Powell, for appellant. R. H. Looney, for appellee.

WILLIE, C. J.

The appellant company was the owner of a stock of cattle in Garza county, its principal office being in the county of Tarrant. The taxes to which the cattle were liable had been duly assessed, and the sheriff of Scurry county, to which Garza was attached for judicial purposes, was proceeding to collect these taxes, when restrained by a writ of injunction sued out in this case. Upon final hearing this injunction was dissolved, and from this judgment of the court the present appeal is taken.

The only question is as to the right of the tax collector of Scurry county to enforce the payment of taxes due upon property in Garza county, it being admitted that the property had been duly and legally assessed. Our constitution and statutes provide that every kind of property situated within the state, and not specially exempted by law, shall be taxed according to its value; and they lay down the general rule that the assessment and collection of taxes upon property shall take place in the county where it is situated. Const. art. 8, §§ 1, 11; Rev St. arts. 4669, 4673, 4676; Laws 1879, c. 50, § 1. The constitution, however, allows the legislature, by a two-thirds vote, to authorize non-residents of counties to pay their taxes at the office of the comptroller of public accounts; and positively requires that non-residents of unorganized counties shall have their lands lying in such counties assessed, and the taxes thereon paid at the office of the comptroller. Article 8, §§ 11, 12. The constitution also requires that all property subject to taxation, and owned by residents of unorganized counties, shall be assessed, and the taxes thereon paid, in the counties to which such unorganized counties are attached for judicial purposes. This provision, as well as that relating to lands lying in such counties, and belonging to non-residents thereof, the legislature carried out by an act approved April 22, 1879. No special provision of either organic or statutory law prescribes the place where personal property belonging to a non-resident individual, or corporation, such as the appellant, shall be assessed, and the taxes thereon collected. Such property is therefore left to be governed by the general rule that all property must be taxed in the county where situated. Indeed, it would require special legislation, adopted by a two-thirds vote, to authorize the payment of such taxes at any other place, and then only at the office of the comptroller; and the power to have the assessment done elsewhere than in the county where the property is situated is withheld from the legislature. The requirement that property shall be assessed, and the taxes thereon paid, in the county where it is situated, cannot be literally complied with in case of an unorganized county, if by being taxed in the county is meant an assessment and collection by officers who reside and have their offices therein. This duty must necessarily be performed by the officers of some other county authorized to discharge these functions in the unorganized county. The constitution itself recognizes the propriety of having the taxes of an unorganized county assessed and paid in the county to which it is attached for judicial purposes. It requires the taxes of residents of such counties to be there assessed and paid, doubtless for the convenience of the taxpayer, as well as the benefit of the county entitled to receive and disburse the money. The reason it did not specially require the taxes of non-residents upon personalty to be paid there also, was no doubt because it wished to leave the...