State v. Mayor, Etc., of Town of McMinnville

• Decision Date: 05 January 1901
• Citation: 61 S.W. 785
• Parties: STATE v. MAYOR, ETC., OF TOWN OF McMINNVILLE.
• Court: Tennessee Supreme Court

61 S.W. 785

STATE v. MAYOR, ETC., OF TOWN OF McMINNVILLE.

Supreme Court of Tennessee.

January 5, 1901.

Appeal from chancery court, Warren county; Walter S. Bearden, Chancellor.

Action by the state of Tennessee against the mayor and aldermen of the town of McMinnville. From a decree of the court of chancery appeals reversing a judgment in favor of defendants, they appeal. Reversed.

Lind & Hoodenpyle, for appellants. G. W. Pickle, Atty. Gen., and I. W. Smith, for the State.

WILKES, J.

The object and purpose of the bill in this cause is to recover state taxes on litigation tried before the courts of the town of McMinnville for offenses committed against the laws of that municipality. It is averred that in a large number of cases tried before the court of that municipal corporation from May, 1881, to July 25, 1895, the officers trying such cases failed to tax up and collect a state tax upon the suits in causes when the defendant was convicted, and when fine and costs were assessed and collected, out of which such state tax could and should have been paid. There was a demurrer to the bill, and the only question presented by the record as it comes to this court is the constitutionality of the act of April 22, 1899, the object and purpose of which was to relieve against and release such taxes. The chancellor was of opinion that the act was constitutional, and, inasmuch as such holding had the effect to deprive the state of revenue to which it would have been entitled under a contrary holding, the state appealed. In the court of chancery appeals the chancellor's decree was reversed, and the act was held to be unconstitutional. The title of the act is as follows: "An act to limit the time in which suits may be brought against any municipal corporation to recover the state or county privilege tax on litigation: in cases tried before a mayor or recorder's court, or any police court, of such corporation, and to authorize the dismissal of such suits now pending." The act itself is as follows:

"Section 1. Be it enacted by the general assembly of the state of Tennessee, that no suit shall be brought against any municipal corporation to recover the state or county privilege tax on litigation in cases tried before the mayor's, recorder's, or any police court of such corporation, prior to July 25th, 1895, when such privilege tax has not been specifically taxed in the bill of costs, and a sufficient amount of money has not been paid to satisfy the fine and costs other than the privilege tax in such cases.

"Sec. 2. Be it further enacted, that it shall be the duty of any court, in which such suit is pending, when this statute is pleaded, and where the truth of the plea is made to appear to the satisfaction of the court, to dismiss the cause, and this act shall apply to any suit now pending, or hereafter to be brought; and that this act shall take effect from and after its passage, the public welfare requiring it."

Acts 1899, c. 274.

The court of chancery appeals held, in substance, that two subjects are stated in the caption or title, one being a limitation of time in which suits might be brought, and another the dismissal of suits then pending; that, passing from the title to the body of the act, section 1 presents a third subject, to wit, a prohibition against bringing any new suit for such taxes;...