The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1871-10-05

people of the State, advising them
in what particular manner to resist
through the Courts of the country
the payment of the school-house, and
such other taxes as are deemed
illegal.
The Convention, by resolution,
declared (haviRg first taken legal
advice) that the order for the collec-
ton of one per cent. ad UalOrem for
the building of school houses, ETC.,
under tbs fifth section of the act, en-
titled "An act to organize and main
tain a system of public free schools in
the State of Texas" laws of 1871,
page 81, is illegal and void, and the
people are advised not to pay the
same, but only to pay One-eighth OF
one per cent. for the above mentioned
purpose, authorized and levied by
the eighth section of an act entitled
Gan act to give effect to the several
provisions of the Constitution con-
corning taxes" Laws 1871, page 43.
In discharge of the duty devolVed
on US in the premises, we say to you:
I. The one per cent. adj valorem,
authorized by section 5, of the act
aforesaid, is illegal and void, and
cannot, if the laws of the State be
enforced, be collected from the tax
payers of the State for three
reasons:
1. The law itself is fatally defect
i've, because it fails to name the
property on which the one per cent.
ad vaZOrem is to be levied.
2. The law is fatally defective in
that it delegates to the directors OF
the school districts the power to levy
taxes on the people, power which
cannot be delegated by the Legisla-
ture to said directors.
8. The said section 5 is supplied
by the eighth section, and repealed,
or put in allegiance, by section 81 Of
the act last mentioned.
II. There can be no question but
what there is direct conflict be-
tween section 5 and section 8 of the
two acts. They both have the same
purpose in view, viz: to raise fund
to build school houses, etc. Section
5 levies one per cent: section 3
levies one-eighth of one per cent.
The act of which section 5 is part
is the Junior law. The two sections
cannot be harmonized. The one or
the other must fall.
III. The junior actis published as
having been approved on the 22d of
April, 1871; the senior law School
law as approved on the 24th of
April, 1871. This publication of
said acts is we'll established fraud,
deliberately perpetrated by Cover
nor Davis. The Journals of the
Senate show that when he approved
the school law, viz: Oath of April,
1871, it had then been law for
seven days, and had been a law three
days before the tax law was pres
sented to him for approval. The
facts and circumstances surrounding
the approval of these laws show that
the Governor, without authority and
without right, sought to change
them in their dates, with reference to
each other, and to make the junior
law take the place of the senior.
We believe that if an effort is
made to collect this one per cent.
tax, that on application to any honest
judge for an Injunction, setting up
the objection to the enforcement of
said section 5 as part of the law of
the State, an injunction will be
granted, and the sheriff or collector
of taxes restrained from further ac-
ton until the question is judicially
determined; and we further believe,
that such injunction, if granted,
will be perpetuated by the highest
courts of the country.
We therefore advise the people to
have resort to the courts of the
country for. relief by injunction
against the collection of the one per
cent. tax named.
The bill for injunction should
seek to enjoin the sheriff from the
execution of law that is null, void
and imperative.
The special facts, which show the
| had faith and fraud of the Govarnor
as well as the further fact, that Sec
ton 5 of the school law is supplied
by the 9Th section of the tax law,
and repealed by section 30, will all
be seen by reference to and COM
parison ofpages 748 and 847, Senate
Journals of 1871, and the two acts
before referred to by caption,
and as published in the laws of 1871.
W. NJ. WALTON,
Chairman Com. of Seven.