Majority
Both parties concede that there are due the defendant real estate taxes for several years, as well as some interest on these taxes. They disagree, however, as to the amount of interest due, and this stems solely from the different beginning dates they employ for the purpose of computing interest. The decedent was an aged person to whom, for some time prior to his death, assistance was allowed under the provisions of Chapter 54 of the Rev.Code of Del., 1935, § 1604 et seq., relating to the State Old Age Welfare Commission and State Welfare Home. The decedent owned real estate in Kent County upon which taxes were assessed and levied for a number of years. Payment of these taxes was deferred under the provisions of Rev.Code § 1623, as amended by 42 Laws of Del. c 114, p. 221. The plaintiff administrator contends that under a proper construction of the statute, interest on all taxes
1 Generally, Kent County real estates taxes become due and payable on June 1 of each year. Rev. Code, § 1409. After September 30 in the year in which the taxes are assessed, there is added “to taxes to be paid thereafter a penalty of one per centum per month until the same shall be paid.” Rev. Code, § 1423, as amended by 45 Laws of Del., c. 128, p. 441.
This Act was adopted in 1939 and amended an earlier statute-which provided that “The property of old age persons to whom assistance has been allowed shall be wholly exempted from taxation and assessment”, the exemption to be terminated upon the discontinuance of the assistance allowed. Under the present Act, taxes are assessed and levied upon the property of persons of the special class described, in the same manner as upon the property of other owners. However, the time for payment of the taxes is “deferred until such time as the property * * * is transferred * * * or until such aged person dies”. In either event, the taxes “without penalties or interest” are “payable within ninety days from the date of such transfer or death”.
Where, as here, the taxes are not paid within 90 days from death, the statute directs that there shall be due the same amount for taxes “as would have been due after the expiration of ninety-days from the date said taxes or assessments became due and payable had the property not been owned by an aged person” within the special class. The statute thus provides that the amount payable be determined on an as-if basis; that is, based upon an assumption contrary to fact. The situation to be assumed.is found in the expression “had the property not been owned by an aged- _ person” within the class. Now, had the property not been own-ed by such a person, taxes would have been due and payable each year after they were levied and assessed; and the amount which “would have been due after the expiration of ninety days from the date said taxes* * * became due and payable” is the face amount of the taxes plus interest at the rate of one per cent a month until payment.
That seems to me a plain, clear meaning of the statutory language, in its context. Of course, in so concluding, I have necessarily construed or interpreted the language. It would ob
Among the most important interpretational considerations in construing language is a finding or conclusion that the language in its context is “plain” or “unambiguous”. This consideration is not readily overcome by others which are more in the nature of preferences for one result rather than another, such as, a preference for a “liberal construction”, or a “narrow construction”, or a construction beneficial to some class of persons, etc. Implicit in the finding of a plain, clear meaning of an expression in its context, is a finding that such meaning is rational and “makes sense” in that context. Here, the charging of interest on taxes not paid within 90 days after death of an aged person (or transfer) is certainly rational and “makes sense” — whether we think it desirable or not. Again, such a construction does not bring about a substantial frustration of other aspects of the purpose of the statute. It allows a deferment of payment of taxes during the lives of persons sought to be benefited (or until transfer); and further, does not interfere with the exemption from interest or penalties during- a 90 day period following death or transfer. True, it might well be considered a greater benefit, direct or indirect, to the class of persons privileged under the Act, to compute interest on taxes only from a date 90 days after death or transfer. But this greater benefit cannot reasonably be said to follow necessarily
For the foregoing reasons, my ultimate construction of the Act is that the beginning date for the computation of interest on unpaid taxes for each year is 90 days after the taxes would have been payable if the property had not been owned by a member of the class privileged by the Act. A peremptory writ'of mandamus should be denied and the petition dismissed.
An order accordingly will be entered.