Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1876-03-05
THE CITY'S BONDS.
Communication o f City-AttOrney Walk
er 10 Mayor FIipPin, Relative 10
the Decisions of The United
States Circuit Court.

The following communication Of City.
Attorney Walker respecting the issuE
and sale by the city OF its own bonds al
less than par, and the decision of the
United States circuit court thereon, will
be read with interest:
To Hon. ]. r. Flippin, Mayor:
SIR think proper to inform you OF
certain decisions lately rendered by the
United .Ststes circuit court in suits to
which the city was party.
First-A trial was had Of the "bOudn
suits, in which the principal point Iiti-
gated and determined was, whether the
issue and sale by the city of its own
bonds, at less than par, was usurious or
illegal. 1t was held to be neither usuri-
Gus nor illegal, and this defense, to
gether with Others Of less Importance,
were ovenuled by the court. These
cases will be at once taken to the su-
preme court OF the United States, where
the questions involved eau be finally de.
termined. These suits did not involve
the one hundred and thirty.five thou.
sand dollars nor the four hundred thou.
sand class.
Second-It was decided by the court,
that, under the msudsmus to pay T. E.
Brown d Co, tho city must levy the
same rate OF taxation upon meTchants'
cap tai, aud for the year, 1875, ss is laid
upon other property. Under this ruling
the city must at once lay an additional
tax Of ti!ty-four cents on merchants
capital for the year 1875 This will
make the entire tax on merchants CAPT.
tai two dollars and fourteen cents, the
amount already levied being one dollar
and sixty cents, and where the
fixed amount paid by the merchant
at the beginning of the year would cover
q tax on his capital at the rate of two
dollars and fourteen cent?, he il, oil
course, not required to pay any more.
This tax is ordered TO be laid and col
iected at once.
Third-In the return OF the city to
Browns writ OF mandamus, set forth
fully and in detail the facts upon which
the ninth and tenth wards claim to be
exempt from that tax, and also the facts1
upon which those persons claim to be
exempt who paid Brown under the spe-
cific assessments, per from. foot, on their
property. On these two questions, the
court held: That the ninth aud tenth
wares were exempt from the Brown |
tax. That tbs property here |
GBCOAhSalAS o5Su ny ItC
foot, and the assessment paid by the |
owner, was exempted from any further |
tax to pay Brown.
In deciding these two questions, Judge |
Brown declared that he bad great dou bit |
Of his jurisdiction, and that he had been
allie to give the question only hasty |
They are questions Of |
great magnitude. Especially is it i'm
1ortant TO get speedy and final de ec.
ninstiOn of the rights nj those who,
without contest, paid the NicoIson pave.
nent assessment. | think that deci.
ion of the supreme csurt of the
United States would fiasly tut a.
est these difficult and embarrassing
IuestiQns; and that I'll IN decision can be
eeedlly obtained. With that view /
intend to take the case at once to the
upreme court of the United S -stss, 90
ar as it relates to the liability Of the
linth and tenth wards, aud Of those per-
ons who have paid the specific assess.
nent for Nicolson pavement. Until a
NAL decision is had, the city should
Ontinue to collect this tsx from all the
property OF the city. Very respectfully,
s. WALKER, City Attorney.