Sturges v. Carter

Citations

• 114 U.S. 511
• 5 S. Ct. 1014
• 29 L. Ed. 240
• 1885 U.S. LEXIS 1788

Syllabus

<p>A statute of Ohio authorized county auditors to issue compulsory process to bring before them persons who, they had reason to believe, were making false returns of their property for purposes of taxation, and to examine them under oath, and required them to notify every person before making entry on the tax list that he might have an opportunity to show that his statement or return was correct A tax-payer was summoned, before the auditor to give information of property not returned for taxation, and appeared, and while in attendance was informed by the auditor of his purpose to increase the amount of property returned by him for taxation : Held, That this was a substantial compliance with the provision requiring the auditor to notify the tax-payer before making entry of the increase. ■</p> <p>The act of the Legislature of Ohio of May 11, 1878, authorizing auditors to extend inquiries into returns of property for taxation, over a peiiod of four years next before that in which the inquiry is made, is no violation of that • provision in the Constitution of that State which declares that “ the General Assembly shall have no power to pass retroactive laws.”</p> <p>Mr. Justice Story’s definition of a retrospective law in Society for Propagating the Gospel v. Wheeler, 2 Gall. 139, has been adopted by the Supreme Court of the State of.Ohio, and is quoted and adopted by this court.</p> <p>The provision § 59 Act of April 5, 1859, of Ohio, that “no person shall be're- • quired to list for taxation any certificate of the capital stock of any company, the capital stock of which is taxed in the name of the company,” does not apply to shares in a foreign corporation which pays taxes in Ohio only on the portion of its property which is situated there.</p>