The New Orleans bulletin. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1874-1876, 1876-03-30
Communicated
THE MAYORS VETO.

no disparagement of him to add that his M Re
active, and perhaps more useful avocations
have not given him the leisure required tor
the mastery and full comprehension of legal
questions. Il is to this fact that We owe the
infelicity of his argument aud citations
against the validity of the tax authorized by
the Legislature TO be imposed upon the people
of this city by their own vote in favor of tie
New Orleans Pacific Railroad.
Assuming that q corporation created by the
people, and of which the tax Payers are TO be
the corporators, and which has been granted
certain public powers for the public benefit
is private corporation for private gain, he
refers to the case decided by the Supreme
Court of the United States, and reported in
20 Wallace of the Loan Association vs.. To-
pska.
Tois was the case of an appropriation BY .
City Council of bolds in aid of o commercial
or manufacturing enterprise for individual
interests and personal purposes Of profit and
gain-to furnish the capital for private ad-
venture. The Supreme Court IN deciding
whether the Legislature had the power to
authorize taxation for such purposes, distinct
~ declared that taxation for railroads was not
Of the character of that demanded by tho
plaintiff in that suit That high tribunal
said, referring to the discussions on this sub
ject:
"It is quite true that Q decided preponder-
ance of authority is to be found in favor Of the
proposition that the Legislatures Of the States,
unless restricted by some special provisions
of their constitutions, may confer upon these
municipal bodies the right to take stock in
corporations created to build railroads, and to
lend their credit to such corporations also,
to levy the necessary taxes on the inhabitants
and on property within their limits subject
to general taxation, to enable them to pay the
debts thus incurred.
"The court then proceeded to show that
the tax thus imposed was held valid because
it was levied for public use or object which
it was the right and the duty OF State govern
ments to assist by money raised from the
people by taxation; that roads, canals, bridges,
navigable streams, and all other highways
had in all times been matters of public con-
Germ. That such channels of travel and of
the carrying busine; had always been estab-
lished, improved and regulated by the State,
and that the railroad had not lost this oharao
ter because constructed by individual enter
prise aggregated into corporation"
There are other characteristics of public
nature conferred on these corporations, such
as the power to obtain right of way, their
subsection to the laws which govern common
carriers, and the like. at is conceded that
when the purpose for which the tsx was to be
issued, could no longer bs justly claimed to
have this public character, but was purely in
aid of private or personal objects, the Law au-
tho-izing it was beyond the legislative power,
and was an unauthorized invasion of private
rights"
There is much more to the same purpose
in this decision.
For our worthy Mayor to rest on this de-
cision in favor of his extraordinary PROPOSE
ton that the New Orleans Pacific Railway is
private association for individual profit and
gain, sffords another illustration Of the old
maxim that every man should stick to his
trade, and that his Honor in adjudicating legal
questions, with such able attorneys by his
side, incurs % great q risk Of burning his
hands as those able city counselors, Messrs
Jonas and Blanc, would if they were to 60 to
his Honor's foundry, and while Archie
Mitchell was immersed in the study of Adam
Smith, attempt to cast plowshare or shaft
for steamboat.
Even without this legal authority, relying
on his own good sense and knowledge. Mayor
Leeds could not possibly have reached the
as the New Orleans Pacific is, was private
corporation, created for individual gain. He
knows to the contrary, and if he did not, the
very object and tenor of the act he seeks to
defeat would have corrected his ignorance
That act has in view to interest the whole tax
paying people, who compose 1.-THE public" in
the profit of the road, and thus prevent the
corporation from being made private one for
individual gain. The franchises and property
Of the company would, therefore, be as much
public property as any Of the buildings or
other property purchased with the taxes Of
the people, and dedicated to public use
Having disposed of this, the leading legal
proposition of his Honor, his veto message
next descends to the very emall-we were
near saying puerile one-that the act of
the Legislature provides no means for taking
the vote of the people on the ordinance. II
his Honor is serious in this that tho City
Council can not legally defray the expenses of
an election which the Legislature directs to
be held, we think that his scruples can be
easily satisfied by his holding the election
without paying the expenses, which would be
alike practical and severely economical.
His Honor next maintains, but does not
trouble himself to elaborate or cite authori-
ties thereto that the public character of this
corporation, for which the people may be
taxed, requires that it should bring it's road
into the city Immediately, and that the people
have no right to tax themselves for railroad,
how valuable and important soever it may be,
to their welfare and interest, which is located
at distance from the city. No reason is
assigned for this purely typographical destina-
ton. If the people can tax themselves for q
railroad we presume that they will hardly be
denied the right of locating that road where il
will do most good. Certainly there is nc
such distinction recognized in any judicial
decisions we ever heard Of
The misapplication by his Honor Of the con.
stitutional requirement that taxation shall be
equal and uniform throughout the State, is toe
obvious for comment. It is q perversion Ia
say that this clause prohibits State tax ex
cept upon the whole State. The clause, q
has been hundred times interpreted by al
the courts, means simply that among all per
sons subject to taxation the tax shall be equa
and uniform. It doesn't mean that the whole
State shall be taxed alike, and that local
parish and district taxation are unconstitu'
tional; only that the people 80 taxed shall
bear like burden. Nor il it State tax, bu
local tax for the particular sections fol
whose benefit the tax is imposed.
The point of his Honor, based on the title
of the bill, that the act itself levies the tax
whereas the title only authorizes tax TO be
levied, is quite too nice, not to say "thin. TO
ordinary comprehension. We do not see hov
a tax can be levied bv an act of the LeQisla