From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People ex rel. Kirkpatrick v. Grippen

Supreme Court of California
Jul 1, 1862
20 Cal. 677 (Cal. 1862)

Opinion

         Appeal from the Seventeenth Judicial District.

         COUNSEL:

         Vanclief & Pratt, for Appellant.

          Cossitt, Davidson & Campbell, for Respondent.


         JUDGES: Cope, J. delivered the opinion of the Court. Field, C. J. and Norton, J. concurring.

         OPINION

          COPE, Judge

         This is a proceeding to determine the right of the relator to collect certain taxes in the County of Sierra. The relator is the Sheriff and ex officio Tax Collector of the county, and the respondent is a Constable, and claims to be the lawful collector of poll and license taxes within his township. He relies in support of his claim upon the Act of April, 1858, entitled an " Act concerning the Collection of Poll Taxes," etc., " in the County of Sierra; " and the question is, whether this act was repealed by the provisions of the Revenue Act of 1860. The Act of 1858 provides for the collection of poll and license taxes by township officers, to be elected annually at the general election by the voters of their respective townships, and to hold their offices until the election and qualification of their successors. The Act of 1860, sec. 3, provides that " For the purposes of revenue, each county in this State is hereby divided into revenue districts, and each township now organized, or that hereafter may be organized in the several counties, shall constitute a revenue district, to be designated in the same manner as said township, or as the Board of Supervisors may direct; provided that the Board of Supervisors of each county, except the County of Placer, shall have power, in their discretion, to consolidate two or more townships in the same revenue district, or to constitute the whole county one revenue district; and provided, further, that no county need be districted until immediately preceding such time as the terms of office of the present incumbent, or any of those now elected to the offices of Assessors or Collectors, shall have expired." Section 23 provides that " At the general election for county officers in the several counties of this State to which the act applies, and every two years thereafter, there shall be elected in each revenue district a Tax Collector, who shall hold his office for the term of two years, and until his successor is elected and qualified; and who shall be Collector in his district of all property taxes, poll taxes, and license taxes of every description." Section 102 provides that " All laws and parts of laws in conflict with the provisions of this act are hereby repealed; provided, that the laws heretofore existing may be enforced in those cases only where the provisions of this act are inapplicable, until the officers provided for in this act are elected and qualified." The Revenue Act of 1861 repeals the Act of 1860, and provides for the election of a County Tax Collector, but makes the Sheriff ex officio Collector in certain counties, including the County of Sierra. This act does not specify to what taxes the duties of the Collector shall extend; and the position taken is that the Act of 1858 was not repealed by that of 1860, and that consequently the duties of the Collector under the Act of 1861 are limited, so far as Sierra County is concerned, to taxes upon property. If it be true that the Act of 1858 was not repealed, the conclusion drawn would seem to be correct; but we regard the act as conflicting with the provisions of the Act of 1860, and as coming within the terms of the repealing clause of that act. It conflicts in several particulars: among which are the substitution of districts for townships, the designation of the collecting officer, the time and manner of his election, and the term of office. In these respects the provisions of the two acts are repugnant and irreconcilable, and there is nothing in the Act of 1860 which shows an intention to save the Act of 1858 from the effect of the repeal. Certain counties are excluded from its provisions, and if the intention had been to exclude the County of Sierra, it is hardly possible that this intention would have been left to inference.

         We are of opinion that the Sheriff is the proper officer to collect the taxes; and the judgment of the Court below is reversed, and the cause remanded.


Summaries of

People ex rel. Kirkpatrick v. Grippen

Supreme Court of California
Jul 1, 1862
20 Cal. 677 (Cal. 1862)
Case details for

People ex rel. Kirkpatrick v. Grippen

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE ex rel. KIRKPATRICK v. GRIPPEN

Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Jul 1, 1862

Citations

20 Cal. 677 (Cal. 1862)

Citing Cases

Beneficial Loan Society, Ltd., v. Haight

"On the other hand, there are many California cases where a later general statute has been held to repeal a…