140 S.E. 748 | N.C. | 1927
Action for the recovery of taxes paid under written protest. C. S., 7979. The taxes paid by the plaintiff in Cherokee County for the year 1925 amounted to $52,632.02; of this amount $6,292.39 was paid under protest for the alleged reason that it had been illegally assessed. After demand duly made in compliance with the statute the plaintiff brought suit to recover the alleged illegal tax; a trial by jury was waived by the parties and the cause was submitted to the presiding judge upon the following agreed facts:
"It is agreed that the Southern Railway Company is a corporation and a common carrier, and owned property in Cherokee County in the year 1925, subject to taxation, of the value of $2,097,464; and that the defendant, Cherokee County, is a quasi-public corporation, and that it levied a general county tax of 45 cents on the $100 valuation of property for the year 1925; that the total tax levied against the property of the plaintiff was $52,632.02 for the year 1925, in Cherokee County; that all of said tax was paid by the plaintiff before the institution of *782 this suit, and that the sum of $6,292.39 was paid under written protest on 25 January, 1926; that the plaintiff, on 5 February, 1926, made written demand for refund of said sum of $6,292.39, upon the proper authority, as required by law; that $9,438.59 was the amount of taxes levied against the property of the plaintiff for general county purposes for the year 1925, based upon the levy of 45 cents per $100 valuation levied and collected by the defendant out of the plaintiff; that $6,292.39, with interest from 5 February, 1926, is the amount in controversy and dispute in this action, and that said amount represents the levy of 30 cents (of the 45 cents) levied and collected by the defendant out of the plaintiff for general county purposes for the year 1925; that the General Assembly of North Carolina, at its session, 1927, passed an act attempting to validate and make legal that part of the tax levied and collected for general county purposes in excess of the constitutional limitation; that a copy of said act is correctly set forth in answer of the defendant, and by consent is made a part of the findings of fact; that this action was instituted in the Superior Court of Cherokee County on 18 April, 1927.
"And it is further agreed that the sole question involved in this litigation is whether or not the levy of 45 cents for general county purposes was valid and whether or not the act of the General Assembly, 1927, validated and legalized the levy of the defendant for general county purposes for the year 1925, amounting to 45 cents on the $100 valuation of the property, which said levy was in excess of the constitutional limitation of 15 cents on the $100 valuation of property to the extent of 30 cents on the $100 valuation of property; and if the court is of the opinion that said act of the General Assembly of 1927, validated and legalized said levy of 45 cents on the $100 valuation for general county purposes, then the court may enter such judgment as in his opinion the foregoing facts warrant, with the right of appeal to Supreme Court reserved to losing party." The Constitution, Article V, section 6, provides: "The total of the State and county tax on property shall not exceed fifteen cents on the one hundred dollars value of property, except when the county property tax is levied for a special purpose and with the special approval of the General Assembly, which may be done by special or general act: Provided, this limitation shall not apply to taxes levied for the maintenance of the public schools of the State for the term required by article nine, section three, of the Constitution: Provided *783 further, the State tax shall not exceed five cents on the one hundred dollars value of property." It is admitted that for the year 1925 the defendant levied a tax of forty-five cents for general county purposes on property valued at one hundred dollars. The two questions for decision are these: (1) Was the levy of forty-five cents invalid? (2) If so, was the invalidity cured by the act of 1927?
With respect to the first question it is apparent that as the levy exceeded the limitation of fifteen cents the excess of thirty cents was imposed in disregard of the constitutional prohibition and was therefore invalid. It was so held in R. R. v. Reid,
Affirmed.