The Lake Charles echo. [volume] (Lake Charles, Parish of Calcasieu, La.) 1876-1898, 1881-02-12

of fifteen mills on the flollarsof the as
sessed valuation of their property
levied to- meet, besides tile current OK
lpenses ofihe city government, the pay
ment of city indebtedness incurred ptiol
to the adoption Of the State Constitil-
tion Of 1870, and prayed that the city
be condemned to accept, in full pay
rncnt, ten mills on the dollar, underline
tax limitation in the present Constitu-
tion. The Supreme Court held that
the constitutional limitation referred
ITO was imperative to defeat the pay
mcnt of municipal indebtedness incur
red prior to the adoption Of the con-
stitnGon.
An association of taxsresistcrs, styled
'FThc New Orleans Tax4Payers' Asso-
citation, and few democratic Journals,
have made this decision in the SaIoy.
case the text fol a.far moro fierce and
savage denunciation of the majority
tof the Court rendering it, than any
which was ever levelled at the KELLOGG
Supreme Cont, forits famous political
decisions, during those dark days Of
political oppression when the chiefs of
the scarpst-bag dynasty telegraphed
from New Orleans to Washington that
memorable dispatch, 'The Supreme
Court of the State is with us" The
three Judges responsible for the de-
cision in the Saloy case are Associate
Justices Todd, Levy and Fenncr, and
for this decision these members Of the
highest judicial tribunal in the State
government have been publicly charged
with having violated the State Consti-
tuition which they swere to support
their impeachment las been publicly
demanded; the Supreme Court (be-
cause they were majority of its mem
bers, has been declared unworthy of
respect; and Justice Todd, because he
was member of the convention which
framed the Constitution, gets the
largest share of this incorporate abuse
There are some things which these
assailants Of the Supreme Court did not
say.
They did not say that the second |
section of the sixth article OF the Con
stitution of the United States declares
"1His Constitution, and the laws of
the United States which shall be made |
in pursuance thereof, and all treaties
made under the authority of the Uni
ted States, shall BE the supreme lar Of
the lantl; aud The jaldges ~ every State
shall be bound thereby, anything in lie
constitution or lars Of any State to tie
contrary notwithstanding"
They did not say the Judges they
denonncedltook the following oath Of
office:
+" ] do solemnly swear that ! will |
support the constitution and laws of
the United States, and the constitn-
ton and laws Of this State; and that
j will faithfully and impartially dis
charge and perform all the duties
incumbent on me as (Chief or Asso-
ciate) Justice ofthe Supreme Court
OF the State of Louisiana, according
to the best Of my ability and under
standing. So help me God"
They did not say that IN any case
of conflict between the State and the
Federal Constitution, the Judges in
every State are compelled to re
cognize the Federal as paramount
to the State Constitution.
They did not say that both the
Federal and the State Constitutions
prolibittiie enactment of en- post Jacto
laws, and laws impairing the obliga-
tions Of contracts.
They did not say that the decision
in the Saloy case was based express
~ and exclusively upon the above
named constitutional provisions.
They did not say thatthe Judges
of the present, like those of the
Nichols, Supreme Court, have mani
Tested a marked sympathy for the
taxpayers Of the State, by setting
aside every tax sale which has come
before them, in which the exact let
ter Of fthela of tax sales had not
been rigidly complied with; thus
furnishing asharp contrast to the
Kellogg Supreme Court, which
affirmed almost every tax sale which
came before lit. Il
They did inot.say that the three
Judges referred to were mensof ex-
cellent reputation for integrity and
ability; that it was incredible they
would imperil that reputation merely
to please D set Of bondholders; thatl
they knewithe decision they pro
posed ito render would be an ex-
tremely unpopular and thatifli