24 N.J.L. 125 | N.J. | 1853
It appears, by the depositions and exhibits submitted to us, that at the annual town meeting for the township of Shrewsbury, in the county of Monmouth, held on the eleventh day of March, 1851, pursuant to law, the inhabitants voted to raise — -.far reads, the sum of five hundred dollars, for
To the sum thus ordered the assessor added the sum of eleven hundred eighty-four dollars, thirty-one cents, being the amount of county tax apportioned to the township, and made out his duplicate for the sum of six thousand and sixty dollars, eighty cents. The prosecutor’s proportion of this assessment was the sum of one hundred and forty dollars and eighty cents.
The school money apportioned to the township amounted to four hundred ninety-nine dollars and one cent. Double this sum was all the town meeting was authorized at that time to raise for schools. A resolution to raise “all the law allows” is somewhat vague; but, the amount being readily ascertained by the assessor, it would perhaps be too strict to consider it wholly void and inoperative. If the sum thus ordered to be raised for schools be added to the o.ne thousand dollars ordered for the roads and the poor and the county tax, the total amount the assessor was authorized to. assess will be the sum of three, thousand one hundred and eighty-two dollars, thirty-two cents, and the fees of assessing, collecting, and paying the same. The residue was illegal, and, so far as the prosecutor is concerned, must be set aside. It was decided at the last term of this court, in the case of The State v. Bently, that the assessor has no right to add any thing for losses or other contingencies.
As to the order of the township committee, it was wholly illegal, and gave no authority to the assessor to increase the sum voted by the town meeting. The power vested in the inhabitants to order money to be raised by tax, is in itself a
The result, therefore, is that the prosecutor’s proportion of the sum assessed, beyond what was authorized by the town meeting and the board of freeholders and the fees of assessing and collecting, must be deducted from his tax, and the residue affirmed. There being no evidence before us showing how much was properly added for fees, a commissioner must be appointed, in pursuance of the practice adopted by the court, to ascertain and report the deduction that ought to be made, upon the principles I have stated.