St. Joseph Lead Co. v. Simms

• Decision Date: 22 February 1892
• Citation: 18 S.W. 906,108 Mo. 222
• Parties: The St. Joseph Lead Company v. Simms et al., Plaintiffs in Error
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

18 S.W. 906

108 Mo. 222

The St. Joseph Lead Company v. Simms et al., Plaintiffs in Error

Supreme Court of Missouri, First Division

February 22, 1892

Appeal from St. Francois Circuit Court. -- Hon. Jas. F. Green Judge.

Affirmed.

Smith & Pipkin with A. Abernathy for plaintiffs in error.

The county board under the statutory provisions relating thereto had the power at its meeting in April, 1891, to raise the valuation of the real property involved in this proceeding. R. S. 1889, secs. 7517, 7518-9. In the language of these statutes, but one intent can be discovered, which is that the county boards of equalization shall meet once a year; shall without any distinction, equalize the valuation of all kinds of property at each meeting. This is the plain interpretation of these sections, and they should be so interpreted, and not be, by the refining process of construction too often indulged in, made to speak a tongue never dreamed of by the legislature. The intent of the legislature is the polar star of interpretation. State v. Hays, 78 Mo. 605; State v. King, 44 Mo. 285; Potter's Dwarris on Statutes, p. 175, et seq.; Henry v. Evans, 97 Mo 47. Where the language is plain there is no room for construction. Henry v. Evans, 97 Mo. 55; State ex rel. v. Gammon, 73 Mo. 425.

Wm. Carter & Weber for defendant in error.

(1) Said board of equalization had no power or authority under the laws of this state to equalize the assessment of the real estate, situate in said county, or to raise the valuation thereof at its meeting in April, 1891, the same having been duly assessed by the assessor of this county, in the year 1889, and said assessment having been passed upon by the state board of equalization at its February meeting in the year 1890, and by the county board of equalization at its meeting in April, 1890. It then became the "basis of taxation on the same for the two years next succeeding." R. S. 1889, sec. 7552; R. S. 1889, sec. 7531, p. 1743; R. S. 1879, sec. 6705; Laws, 1881, sec. 5, p. 180; Laws, 1881, p. 178, sec. 1; Laws, 1883, p. 134, sec. 1; Goold v. Lyon Co., 36 N.W. 906. (2) Nor did section 7518, Revised Statutes, 1889, relieve said board of its dilemma, or authorize it to raise the assessed value of the respondent's property at its meeting in April, 1891, when construed in connection with section 7552, Revised Statutes, 1889, and section 6705, Revised Statutes, 1879, and in connection with the past legislation of this state, governing the assessment of real estate and the power and duties of county boards of equalization in reference thereto. See authorities above cited. Const. 1875, sec. 18, art. 10; G. S. 1865, secs. 10, 13, p. 100; G. S. 1865, p. 97, sec. 14; Laws of 1870, sec. 1, p. 114; Laws of 1872, sec. 48, p. 92; Laws of 1873, sec. 15, p. 87.

Black J. Barclay, J., absent.

OPINION

Black, J.

The assessor of St. Francois county duly assessed two tracts of lands belonging to the plaintiff for taxation at the biennial assessment beginning on June 1, 1889. He assessed one tract containing six hundred and ninety-seven acres at the sum of $ 300,000, and the other containing seven hundred and fifty-five acres at the sum of $ 125,000. The county board of equalization met at the time appointed by law, namely, the first Monday in April, 1890, and adjourned without day, making no change in the assessed value of this property. The board met again on the first Monday in April, 1891, it being the sixth day of the month, and on the ninth day of the same month made an order raising the assessed value of the first-named tract to $ 320,000, and the second to $ 155,000. The board then adjourned to the twenty-second of the same month, and in the meantime gave plaintiff notice of the change. The plaintiff appeared on the last-named date and objected to the increase of the assessed value, on the ground that the board acted in the matter without authority of law, but the board overruled the objection and adhered to its previous order. Thereupon, the plaintiff sued out this writ of certiorari, and upon final hearing the circuit court quashed and declared the order of the board of equalization null and void, from which judgment the persons constituting the board appealed.

The claim of the defendant is that the county board of equalization had a right, under the law, to equalize the assessment, either at its meeting in April, 1890, or at its meeting in April, 1891; while the plaintiff insists that the board had no power to change the assessed value after the meeting in 1890; that its jurisdiction over this property then ceased.

Section 7552, Revised Statutes, 1889, provides: "Real estate shall be assessed at the assessment which shall commence on the first day of June, 1881, and shall only be required to be assessed every two years thereafter. Each "assessment of real estate so made shall be the basis of taxation on the same for the two years next succeeding."

Section 7517 declares that "there shall be in each county in this state, except the city of St. Louis, a county board of equalization which board shall consist * * * and shall meet at the office of the county clerk on the first Monday of April of each year."

Section 7518 gives the board power "to hear complaints and to equalize the valuation and assessments upon all real and personal property within the county," and the persons constituting the board having taken the oath "shall immediately proceed to equalize the valuation and assessment of all such...