*1 Consumptives’ County et Jewish Treasurer Koenig, al. Society. ief Rel Mr. William L. Boatright, Mr. Paul P. Prosser, At Mr. torney General, Roach, First for Assistant, Charles in error. plaintiffs Philip Mr. John C. Mr. for defend- Vivian, Hornbein,
ant in error. En Banc. sitting
Mr. Burke, Justice delivered the the court. Campbell, in error are hereinafter referred to as Plaintiffs and defendants error as the County Society. presents simple question
This record of the tax- ability devoted Society brought injunction prohibit dairy equipment and livestock *2 complaint A so devoted. demurrer to the was overruled. judgment The stand, elected to and to review the thereupon prosecutes entered it this writ. compelled, reluctantly,
We feel most to reverse judgment. provided this Tax for in X ex article of our 3 thereof Constitution. Section empts “personal property” to the value $200 family. exempts property head of- a 4 Section (so appli personal.” “real 5 here and Section far as cable) exempts buildings with “Lots, # * * buildings exclusively for strict and ly 6 “All charitable reads: *,” and section exempting property laws than that from hereinbefore mentioned shall be void.” appears clear- makers had constitution thus ly into real in the usual classification mind they they personal. Wh.en meant thereon” said so. When said “Lots say “personal property,” unless in rare not did such could be so instances when classified. Certainly they not “cows.” That did cows have relation to land and are devoted the same direct pose personal prop- does not alter the situation. Most erty, in the to which it is devoted, every true of horses, from land. This is farmer’s cows, machinery by goods; and household but these are not there- buildings. into land or Said
converted section ex- empts separate taxation certain ditches, canals These are and flumes. worthless unless cleaned re- paired. But the does not reach the horses, machinery cleaning repair- and tools with which ing is done. we have been most liberal in our
True,
construc
tion of
but in no case
5,
said section
have we held live-
phrase
there
“Lots,
in the
stock included
any
any
or
on,”
authority, justifying
construction,
nor can we find
rule
doing.
question
is no
in so
us
disposition,
liberality,
as to
our
our
or our
what the law
be. We
the Constitu
should
are bound
exempted only
Its makers could well have
“live
pur
stock used
poses,”
such
im
use of
livestock were
possible
ground
without the use
no
of land
foot of
thereby
meaning
exempted.
language
plain,
be
The
nothing
clear, and no
Hence there
is involved.
interpret.
People
We must enforce it as written.
Seeley May,
ex rel.
9 Colo.
further herewith. Campbell participating. *3 Justice Holland dissents. Holland, dissenting. dairy owning using the herd That institution the sought carrying to be is a charitable institution taxed, ques- great nonprofit on a humanitarian is not service, questioned tioned. Neither it the is that herd is by used the institution in connection with its charitable purpose. admittedly unquestion- This is so true that ably support exemption it if an at- would a claim for tempt realty. was made to tax the adopting
In an extreme liberal rule of construction exemption “lots, to of with reference the constitutional the used religious worship, schools, or for gone this court has exempt property upon far to vacant a declared so as purpose making exempt intention to use the same for a it says it now taxation, buildings “When said ‘lots say, ‘personal thereon’ did not property,’ when unless rare instances building a in the latter If, case, so could be classified.” exemp- determine the be so classified, could express language According of the to the Con- exemp- one to there is but condition essential stitution, apparent It is that the use. taxation, tion from the a well founded doubt there is room for as that of the Constitution with refer- intention of the framers grant of to the institu- ence being may we resort to construction. so, and this tions, provisions of Con- An involved. The the exemption the here claimed. It stitution do not forbid of for other forbid does spirit poses. In the truth undoubted fact, exemption, provision if then so, we the favors destroys undoubtedly ? the was that the latter understanding the when Constitution was time, the brought purpose was into that if a charitable existence, hampered by that it would fostered and governmental to be burden that have relieve clearly supported otherwise borne. This conclusion by exemption provi- placed upon the the construction during by far I know, so as authorities, sions period adoption the Constitution. Is all the since the contrary made this custom now to be abandoned so policy expressed adminis- state apparent from the Constitution trative officials and also majority opinion, opened, by the itself? The door is now religious personalty and edu- charitable, to tax all the was cational even its use made institutions *4 realty on which it reason public policy I be located or used. believe forbids. dairy cattle its herd of institution, necessary purpose, equipment the charitable to further is an unit for therefor, equally inseparable intended, and uses I cannot it was in- believe ever for taxation for charitable an exemption to grant tended taxation. tbe nse destroy and then reasons I dissent. respectfully Bonding and Insurance
Reed Massachusetts Company. March Rehearing 1936. denied