Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1881-05-19
TIE DRAINAGE CASE.
The Continuation of the Argument on
Constitutional Points.

Constitutional Points.
In the Supreme Court yesterday, IN til
argument on the eolstitutionahty OF Tn
Drainage Act, Judge Wallace concluded nj
argument, tie points of which were outline
Yesterday. It should have been stated i
Yesterdays report that before The argumen
was entered upon, W. c. Belcher, one of tn
attorneys for the Drainage Directors, in ask
ing the Court to extend the time usual
allowed counsel, stated that it was concede
by both sides, and was undisnuted, that tn
case as made squarely presented the question
of the constitutionality of the Drainage Act
aud that no other question would be dis
cussed.
| W. H. Sears concluded ths arguments il
the case yesterday, appearing against tn
Directors and claiming the Act to be uncon
stitutional. These were the chief points h
made:
! First-That the title of the Act does no
express its subject, and the subject is not ex
pressed in the title It is an Act to promote
drainage, but Section 2 limits it TO protection
of cities and towns and lands from overflow
to restrain the flow of DEBRIS ETC., and that Ii
not to promote drainage.
Second-It is a one-ma1. power lAW-the
Governor appoints the Engineer, and they
and the Surveyor name the district, and the
Governor names the Directors, and has the
power Of removal. So the whole control Is
conferred in the Governor.
Third-It il a delegation OF legislative
power to the Beard to form districts. Inc
Engineer recommends the boundaries OF
district, and yet the Board may change them
or reject the report. This is a delegation OF
legislative power. The report should De MADE
to the Legislature.
Fourth-It confers on the Board OF Direc-
tors the right OF eminent domain, and the
power to condemn lands in or out of the dis
trics for reservoirs to store mining debris.
Such storage is a special purpose, hence such
power is unconstitutional.
Fifth-The cost of the works is to be paid
out of the construction fund OF the district,
or out of the State construction fund. The
Board audits its own accounts, and the State
Examiners are prohibited from auditing
them.
Sixth-The Directors levy the tax for the
district, which is delegation of legislative
power.
Seventh-There is no appropriation in the
Act. The money is paid into the funds, but
the Act does not provide for its appropria-
ton.
Eighth-County Auditors and Assessors
are to be paid extra for making the assess
ment books. This increases their salaries,
and is unconstitutional.
Ninth-The Act is special, because limited
to one kind of mining, as it applies to gravel
mining, and not to other kinds of mining that
deposit debris in the streams.
Tenth-The Act levies tax or assessment
on miners for the use of water, and not on
the basis of the value of the property. 1t
taxes hydraulic mines, and they thus pay
three taxes, and it is therefore unconstitu-
tional, as it is special. 1t levies the tax on
mines in or out of the district that deposit
debris in the stream. 1t is not license, for
that is payment for a privilege for carrying
on a business.
Eleventh-There is reference in the Act to
surveys of swamp lands to be made, and that
they be assessed within the district. But
the money provided for in each cannot be
used to reclaim swamp lands at all. The Di-
rectors are to assess the value of the reclama-
ton of swamp lands. This makes the Board
Board of Assessors, and it lays an assess
on the value of the land, and hence the Act
is unconstitutional.
Twelfth-It provides that the tax on
swamp lands may be paid in six equal pay
ments. This is not general, and is therefore
unconstitutional. Taxes to be paid in install
ments must apply to all the lands in the
State.
Thirteenth-Section "a says there shall be
levied each year by the same officers and in
the same manner as are other taxes, etc,
This does not make the levy; it only says a
levy shall be made. II it is to be at the same
time and manner as other taxes are levied, it
must be by the Legislature.
Fourteenth-All money raised under the
a ct IL fo Ia y1sa1 ay0lrsiya1v for ramon dino
the debris from the mines specified by the
erection of dams and for the rectifcation
of the streams in which the debris flows.
Now, the mines specified are the gravel
mines, and the rivers are those in which the
gravel debris flows. So this confines the
expenditure of all the money to impounding
the debris from gravel mines, and these are
a special class of mines, and to the rivers in
which gravel debris flows. Now, there are
60 or 20 rivers in the State, and not over a
half dozen in which gravel debris flows from
hydraulic mines. Therefore the law is special
in applying to few and not all the rivers in
the State.
Fifteenth-It authorizes the State Treas
urer to pay warrants. when there are No de-
mand funds, out of any other moneys not ap-
propriated. But there is no appropriation of
any of the funds to pay the warrants. Ar
ticle W., Section %, says no money shall be
drawn from the treasury but in consequence
of appropriations made by law. Article ",
Section % says the general appropriation
bill shall contain no items but for salaries
and the expenses for the support Of institu-
tions under the exclusive control of the State.
Article ~, Section "a, says no bill making an
appropriation, except the general appropria-
ton bill, shall contain more than one item,
and for one single and certain purpose, to be
therein expressed. If the Drainage District
is an institution under the exclusive control Of
the State the appropriation must be in the gen.
eral appropriation bill. Ii an appropriation is
made in this Act, or separate bill, then
there must be but one item, and that for a
single and certain purpose. Now there is no
appropriation in the general or any other
bill containing ore item for the single and
certain purpose of promoting drainage
therefore there is no appropriation at all to
carry on the works (i5 Cal, Stratton VS..
Greenl You cannot tax the people Of the
State to prevent damage being done by an
individual to the lands of others or to pub
lie highway. Benefits promoted by State
taxation are compensation to the taxpayer in
return for his contribution to the State
treasury. He who receives the benefits
ought to sustain the burden. 1t ia against
the principles of Government to tax a
people to allow an individual to infict q
damage upon them. No man should be
compelled TO contribute to be ruined by
Others when he has no interest with them.
General taxation for such local and special
Purposes is mauifestly unjust
The Court gave each p1rty leave to file
briefs, the people within ten days and the
respondents within ten days thereafter.
FIRE YESTERDAY MORNING. alarm Of
FIRE which was given yesterday morning at
o'clock from box -, was caused by the
burning Of the two-story building located on
the southeast corner of Front and II streets,
and occupied By 7. Jeffrey as a grocery, and
boarding house ebove. The prompt work OF
the Fire DEPARTMENT saved the building, but
the stock OF groceries and inside Of the lower
story were badly burned. 1t was undoubtedly
a case of incendiarism after a robbery of the
store, as a rear window furnished evidence oil
an entry having been made, and faucets tC
coal-oil and liquor casks were left turned on
90 as to aid the flames. Mr.. jeffrey and
family were asleep upstairs at the time,
and came near being suffocated. The house
belonged to the estate of the late John Nc
IsaacI, and upon which insurance of 81, OOC
was held in the Commercial Company, q
which A. Leonard is agent. The stock and
fixtures, owned by Mr.. jeffrey. were insured
for 81 900 in the London, Liverpool and
Globe Company. w. p. Coleman, agent
There was also $500 insurance upon the fur
niture in the last named companies. The
entire loss is estimated at 81 800 to 81, 600.
NAVIGATION OF THE MoKELuMNE.-Colone