The Mayor v. Hines

• Decision Date: 31 January 1875
• Citation: 53 Ga. 617
• Parties: The Mayor and Aldermen of Savannah, plaintiff in error. v. James K. Hines et al, defendants in error.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

53 Ga. 617

The Mayor and Aldermen of Savannah, plaintiff in error. v. James K. Hines et al, defendants in error.

Supreme Court of the State of Georgia

(Atlanta, January Term, 1875.)

Tax. Partnership. Before Tudge Tompkins. Chatham County. At Chambers. March 9th, 1875.

For the facts of this case, see the decision.

Jackson, Lawton & Basinger, for plaintiff in error.

A. B. Smith, for defendants.

Warner, Chief Justice.

This was a bill filed by the complainants against the defendant, praying for an injunction to restrain it from the collection of a tax of $25 00 which the defendant, by an ordinance, had imposed on every lawyer in the city of Savannah, for municipal purposes. The presiding judge granted the injunction prayed for, and the defendant excepted.

1. By the 4847th section of the Code, the Mayor and Aldermen of the city of Savannah, have full power and authority, *to make such assessments and lay such taxes on the inhabitants of said city, who transact or offer to transact business therein, as said corporate authorities may deem expedient for the safety, benefit, convenience, and advantage of said city. On the 30th day of December, 1874, the mayor and aldermen of said city passed a general ordinance to assess and levy taxes for the year 1875, to raise revenue for the city, on the inhabitants thereof, including those who held taxable property therein, and those who transact or offer to transact business therein, by the 6th section of which ordinance it is declaredthat every person and corporation transacting, or offering to transact, either of the kinds of business hereinafter mentioned shall pay the tax hereinafter prescribed, to-wit: "Every lawyer, physician and dentist, $25 00." The 15th section of the ordinance declares that a "a firm or copartnership of persons carrying on business jointly in the same establishment, and bona fide as partners, shall not be compelled to pay more than one tax for the business of one establishment." By the 2d section of the act of the general assembly of 1874, a specific tax of $10 00, was levied upon every practitioner of law, medicine and dentistry. By the 11th section of that act it is declared "that no assessment shall be made for corporation or county purposes, on the specifis taxes herein imposed on practitioners of law, medicine, dentistry, and photography: Provided, this section shall apply to all who practice and charge for the same." The tax complained of is not a tax assessed by the defendant as a...