sentation of the ministers and elders of the church, regulated by Act 5th Assein. 1694.- Assembly, unlawful. In criminal law. The nssenibling of three or more persons together [0 do an unlawful act, who separate without I: Liiaily doing it, or making any motion to- iuiiils it. 3 Inst. 176: 4 Bl. Comm. 146. It dorm from a riot or root. because in each of the latter cases _there is some act done besides
the simple meeting. See tate v. Stnlcup. 23 N. 1‘ 30 2:5 Am. DH‘, 9 -:\i‘ 8: P. 91. 5(r.- .17: .h.C .Law,§
- 2 ‘Bush. Grim. Law. §§ E56, 1259.
ASSENT. Compliance; approval of something done: a declaration of willingness to do something in compliance with a request.
- \«oi'ton v. Davis 83 i‘ex. 32. 18 S. W. 430;
ippcal of Pittsburgh. 115 Pa. 4, 7 At]. 778; ("i.n'ii Co. \. Railroad Co., 4 Gill 6: J. (Md) 1. 30; Baker v. Johnson County, 37 Iowa. 189: Fuliet v. Kemp (ijom. P1.) 16 N. Y. Supp. 160.
—Mutusl assent. The meeting of the minds of hr-‘h or all tln parties In a cmiliact: the fact that each agiecs to .ill the ter s and conditions. in the some sense and who the same
meaning as the others. ce ‘o. v. Young. 23 ‘Vail. H77. 3 L. lid. i . ASSERTORY COVENANT. One which
rifiirms that a particuiar state of facts ex- ists; an affirming promlae under seal.
ASSESS. 1. To ascertain, adjust, and settle the respective shares to be contributed I-v several persons toward an object beneflr-ial to them ali, in proportion to the benefit received.
2. To adjust or fix the proportion of a tax which each person, or several liable to it, has to pay; to apportion a tax among several: to distribute taxation in a proportion founded on the proportion of burden and iieiicfit. Allen v. McKay, 120 Cal. 332. 52 Pac. 829; Seymour v. Peters. 67 Mich. 415, 35 N. W. 62.
3. To place a valuation upon property for the piirpnse or apportioning a tax. Bride- uell v. l\hirton_ 46 Ark. 73; Moss v. Hiudes, 29 Vt. 231.
4. To unpose a pecuniary payment upon persons or IlI'0n(‘I'tYZ to tax. People v. Priest, 100 N. Y. 4353. 02 N. E. 563.
ASSESSED. Where the charter of a corporation provides for the privment by it of a state tax, and contains a proviso that “no other tax or impost shall be levied or as '2ssed upon the said company," the word ‘ ssessi-vi“ in the proviso cannot have the force and meaning of ilescriliing special levies for piililic improvements, iiut is used merely to describe the act of le\ ying the tax or imposr. New Jersey Midland R. Co. v. Jeisey City. 42 N. J. Law, (17.
ASSESSMENT. In a general sense, de- notes the process of ascertaining and adjusting the shares respectively to be contributed iiy several persons towards a common beneficial object according to the benefit received.
94 ASSESSM ENT
In taxation. The listing and valuation of property for the purpose of apportioning ii tax upon it, either according to vaiue alone or in proportion to benefit received. Also determining the share of a tax to be paid hy each of many persons; or apportioning the entire tax to be levied among the different taxable persons, establishing the proportion due from each. Adams. etc., Co. v. Shelby- ville, 154 Ind. 467, 57 N. E. 114. 49 L. It. A. 797. 77 Am. St. Rep. 484; Webb v. Bid- well, l-'1 1\liun. -183 (Gii. 30-1): State v. Farm- er, 94 Tex. 232, 59 S. W. 541; Kinney v. Zimpleman, :56 Tex. 582; Southern R. Co. v. Kay, 62 S. C. 28. 39 S. E. 785; U. S. v. Erie R. Co., 107 U. S. 1, 2 Sup. Ct. 83. 27 L. Ed. 385.
Asscssnient, as used in juxtaposition with taxation in a state constitution. includes ali the steps necessary to be taken in the legitimate exercise of the power to tax. Hurfor v. Omaha, 4 Neb. 336.
Assessment is also popularly used as u synonym for t'1x:ition in general,—thc lilitl.|0I'|IHI|V€ imposition of a rate or duty to he paid. But in its technical smnification it. denotes only taxation for a special pur— pose or lociil iiiiprovemrnt; local taxation. as distinguished from general taxation: tux- ation on the principle of apportiniiiiieiit according to the relation between burden and benefit.
As distinguished from other lunds of taxation, assessments are those special and locni impositions upon property in the immediate vicinity of muiiioipni improvements which are necessary to pay for the improvement, and are laid with reference to the special benefit which the prop- erty is supposctl to have derived therefrom. Hale v. Kcnusha, 29 Wis. And see Ride- nour v, alhn. 1 Handy (Ohio) 464; Roosevelt Hospital v. New York. 84 N. Y. 1.8, 112: I\ing v. Portland, 2 Or. 140: Reeves v. Wood County, 8 Ohio St. 3738; “’ood v. Brady, (‘-3 Cnl. ‘ES, 5 Pnc. 627%. 8 Piic. 5139.
Taxes are iinpositions for purposes of gcneriii revenu _ while assessments are spec-iai and lot-ai inipnsitions upon property in the i.nLmerlii1Le vicinity of on improvement, for the public wel- fare, which are necessary to -pay for the improvement and made with reference to the special benefit which such property derives from the expenditure. Palmer v. Stumph. 29 lnd A special assessment is a charge in the nature of a tax, imposed for the purpose of paying the cost of a local improvement in a muiil ipal corporation. ziurl icviell only on lhose par- cels of real property which, by reason of the location of such improveme-nt.are spccially bonefitted by it Village of Virw,-;a.u Park v. Wii<- wall, 155 H1. 262. 40 \‘_ E. Gil‘. Auburn. 27 Nah. 13 N W. 2 li ‘
2 14 S. Tl. 521. 17 L. R.
v. Peace, 110 N. C. *3 . t 17. Tuttle, (37 Conn. 162, 3-1 A. 822.
A. 3510‘. Snrgen Atl. 1023. 32 L. R.
Assessment and tax are not synonymous. An assessment is doubtless a tax, but the term impiies something more: it implies a tax of a partlculnr kind, predicated upon the principle of equivalents, or benefits, which are pcriiii-ir to the persons or property charged thereivitli, and which are said to be assessed or appraised, according to the measure or proportion of such equivalents; whereas a simple tax is imposed for the purpose of supporting the government generally, vvitliout reference to any special ad-
vnntuge which may be supposed to accrue to