Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1880-03-19


If the people of Maine and Florida, of
North Carolina and Illinois and Ohio, sub
nit cheerfully to taxation which is ex-
pended in constructing harbors and light
houses and public buildings on the Pacific
coast, with what show of reason can the
people of one State resist the leyying of
taxes which are to be expended wholly in
benefting that State? 1t is a narrow and
fallacious view which contends that Los
Angeles and Mendocino and Kern county
and Plumas have no such interest in the
salvation of the. Sacramento valley as can
justify the taxation of those counties for
such purpose. On the contrary, it is a
demonstratable fact that every taxpayer
in the State, from one end to the other
has positive and undeniable interest in
the accomplishment of this great work,
and that all should contribute willingly to
it. The ruin of this valley means the ruin
of San Francisco, and the ruin of San
Frarcisco implies the decadence OF the
entire State. There is a strong commu-
nifty of interest binding all the people of
the State together, and to ignore the
existence of this bond would be most
ealamitous. Again, it is evident that in
this case the State appears in the attitude
of solicitor before the sufferers from the
debris. The natural impulse of the latter
is to procure the stoppage of the flow of
debris at all hazards. Left to themselves
they would pursue their remedies in the
Courts, and would insist upon the aban-
donment of hydraulic mining, if no other
mode of relief could be found But the
STATE sees that the suspension of the hy-
draulic mines would injure the community,
and therefore it seek means of protecting
the farmers which will avoid that necessity
It is, however, distinctly for the interest
of the State, more than for the interest of
the farmers, that this policy should be
adopted, and therefore it is plainly incum-
bent on the State to assist in bringing about
the solution which. it deems best adapted
to the general welfare. At such
a juncture it cannot tell the farmers that
they ought to bear the whole expense of
the relief works. 1t is its clear duty to
distribute that expense over the whole
community, since it is in the interest of
the whole community that the farmers are
asked to forego their right of demanding
the suspension of hydraulic mining. There
are consequently special reasons for the
acceptance of the plan of general taxation
in this case, and they appear to us to be
impregnable ones. But it is not to be as
sumed that there is anything novel in
the application of this principle to State
affairs. 1t is done every day. The school
tax is a ready example of it. That tax is
not assessed on the basis of local benefits,
but on the broad foundation of State
needs. 1t is necessary to the well-being of
the community that the educational
agencies shall be everywhere attainable.
Consequently no hesitation is felt in
making wealthy sections contribute much
more than their own share to the fund,
since there are poor sections which other
wise could not maintain schools. In the
debris case the existence of a State need
is not less apparent than in the case of the
schools, and the argument for general tax
alton in regard to it is equally strong.
We do not believe, moreover, that the
people are inclined to resist the applca-
ton of this principle. We rather believe
that members of the Legislature who have
put themselves in opposition to it mistake
the temper of their constituents not less
than they mistake the scope and meaning
of enlightened craftsmanship. The debris
question is a subject for State treatment.
if ever there has been such subject, and