New Orleans Republican., 1872-05-23

anu preservation OF bn6 whole.
1t has been suggested that, after all, the
Legislature. could prevent the judges
from receiving their salaries by re-
fuslng to levy the taxes necessary to OBJ
tain the money. But the answer to this
proposition is obvious and conclusive.
There ls law on the statute books levying
a tax for the support of the government,
and any statute repeating that law without
making some other provision would be un-
constitutional and void, as an exercise of
power on the part of the Legislature not
vested in that department. OF the govern
ment. A part can not destroy the whole.
1t was suggested by the learned gentle
man who argued this application for the
relators, that in most Of those cases in
which the courts of this land have held
laws unconstitutional and void, it has been.
not for the violation, in explicit terms, of
some particular article or section of the
constitution, but because the statute so
held void has been found to be inconsistent
with provisions of the fundamental law not
particularly or specially ignored. For in
stance in tie case of Crandeall VS.. the State
of Nevada, 6 Wallace, 35. The Legisla-
ture of Nevada passed an act imposing a
tax on railroad or stage companies for pas
sengers carried out of the State. The law
was attacked and held by the Supreme
Court of the United States not to violate
that provision of the federal constitution
which fOrbids the State to lay duty on
exports, nor to violate any specific article
of the constitution; but it was declared un
constitutional and void because it was in
consistentlwith the maintenance of the ma
tiOnal gov vbrnment in its full powers This
is a nation 1t has capital. All the citizens
of the States are citizens of the nation
They havd a right to approach the Capitol,
and any attempt on the part of the State to
impose RESTRICTIONS on such rights is cal
culated tb destroy the government, and,
therefore, violates the constitution.
These principles apply to the case of
these rela1Ors. They are judicial officers.
The maint ntenance of the judicial depart
ment of tile government, and the free and
untrammeled exercise of the duties of such
officers, is necessary to the maintenance of
the Cover hment, and any statute or any
regulation as ! have said, calculated to
prevent be exercise of such authority
must be bid to be in violation of the spirit
of the con BtitutiOn, and must be set aside
While d judge is in office his salary
(which can never be decreased below $4,000
per annuni), can not be changed by Iegis-
lative t4ority. The object of this provi-
sion is to protect the judges from the other
departments of the government, and to
render them independent of threats or in
of New York said in the case Of the People
VS.. Hay, 80 Barber, 2l3: "They could not
be either starved or induced into plant
adoption Of construction, by the Legisla-
ture, of constitutional restrictions and
limitations OF its own powers"
In the case of Conner vs.. the city of New
York, SanfOrd's New York Reports, the
court was considering a question of tenure
of office. A certain Office was established
by the constitution; the tenure and COM
pensatiOn. was left to the Legislature;
it was held that the Legislature might make
any tenure or fix any compensation except
''that the Office could not be virtually abol-
ished by colorado reduction of the COM
or by taking itaWay altogether"
Such an act would not have been a spe-
cifc violation of any particular provision
Of the constitution, but would be incOn-
eistentent with the maintenance of that
provision authorizing the appointment of
the officer.
Again, these principles are applicable to
the case at the bar. The judges and the
other constitutional officers of the State
have their salaries fixed; the amount de-
was supposed to be a reasonable
and Just compensation for their services.
Any provision of law or any conduct on the
part of the officers of the government re-
1uciDg that compensation, violates the con-
stitutiOn as much as would an act depriviUg
5he constitutional officers of any compensa-
lion whatever.
The moneys collected by taxation are col
ected for various puIpOses-paid into the
treasury to the credit OF various funds.
There are thirteen funds, such as the sin
-erest tax fund" the "leyee tax fund, -" the
'levee construction fund, etc. The law i'm
poses specific taxes for the creation of these
special funds, and the moneys collected are
paid into these funds and disbursed for their
account. But there is a general tax which
yOes into the general fund in the treasury,
Jut of which are paid all Of the salaries of
public officers and the current expenses of
he government.
1t was argued at bar that the right of
officers to be paid by prefer
,nce is so sacred flor so necessary that the
MONEYS paid to the credit of these several
unds might be used for that purpose. l
10 not agree with this opinion. The Legis-
ature has unlimited powers of taxation for
public purposes. In its discretion it has
power to impose specific taxes for specific
purposes; persons who pay such taxes have
right to see that the moneys so paid by
hem shall not be used for any other pur-
)ose and if the Legislature has imposed
ak sufficient to create general fund large
enough to pay all of the constitutional OIL |
ers of the State and current expenses, |
hey must look to that fund for their com
,ensatiOn. As l intimated above, believe |
hat the law imposing such tax could not |
,e repealed unless another was enacted in |
is stead this affords protection.
1t is clear to me from these various con- |
ideratiOns that it is the duty of this court, |
which is vested with the exclusive authOri- |
y of issuing the prerogative writs at the |
eat of government to correct the abuse |
harged by these relatOrs, and clearly |
Droven by the evidence offered. By a |
trict adherence to a statute determining |
he duty of the Treasurer, he daily violates |
he constitution by reducing the salaries of |
he Judges of the State. He endangers the |
xistence of the government by depriving |
is officers of the means by which they live. |
lie follows the letter of the law and de- |
troys the spirit of the constitution.
l think the relatOrs have pointed out the |
emedy. They pray that mandamus may |
ssue against the State Treasurer, in order /
o remedy defective police in his Office, |
nd to repair wrong done them, for which /
here is no remedy by the ordinary means. |
will issue the writ.
1t is therefore ordered, adjudged and de- |
reed, that a writ of mandamus issue !
.gainst Antoine Dubuclet, Treasurer of the |
State Of Louisiana, commanding him to pay |
he warrants of the State Auditor held by /
he REALTORS and described in their petition, |
'ut of any moneys in the treasury to the |
redit OF the general fund, or which may |
irst come into the treasury; and command |
ng the said Dubuclet to require the officers !
harged with the collection of the revenues |
# the State to pay the moneys collected by |
hem into the treasury of the State, and |
commanding and requiring the said Dubu- |
let to hold and retain all moneys received |
y him to the credit of the general fund for |
he payment Of the constitutional officers of !
he State by preference, over all other cred |
tors demanding payment.
United States District Court.
w. Patterson VS.. Steamer Belle Ida.-T.