Sacramento daily record-union., 1881-06-16
TIE MEMPHIS CASE.

COHulllOn VI D&S SNAN
community was abundantly able to pay
its debts, it refused to do SO, and in Jan
uary, 1879, it secured the passage by the
Legislature of bill repeating its charter,
and creating the so-called Taxing Dis
trict of Shelby County in its stead. On
February 18th of the same year Receiver
was appointed by one of the Federal
Courts, to take charge of all the city prop
erty. and vested with power to collect
some SO, ,0O0, 000 of unpaid taxes, by gar
nishment or otherwise. The repeating act
having been taken to the State Supreme
Court it was declared constitutional, the
Court holding that " municipal corpora
tions are within the absolute control of
+" the Legislature, and can be abolished at
'sany time in its discretion, and an Act
(which repeals the charter of single
municipal corporation is constitutional. "
Follow ing this decision the United States
Supreme Court decided the action OF the
Federal Court appointing Receiver, to be
void. Thus far the repudiators appeared
TO have had it all their own way, but now
change has come over the spirit of their
dream, for the State Supreme Court, in The
case of O'Conner against the city of Men,
phis, which was suit pending against tie
city at the time of the repeal of its charter,
has made new decision which completely
alters the situation.
In this case the plaintiff moved 10 re-
vive against the Taxing District, on the
ground that the latter is in legal effect the
same corporation as the city. The ma
iority of the Court, according to the Mem
phis Aualqnche, concurred in the opin-
sion that the reviver should be ordered,
holding that the Taxing District was
municipal corporation, organized for the
I" government of the same people and ter
ritory as were formerly under the local
government of the city. The Court
"holds that so much of the Act establish
'' ing the Taxing District as declares that
sit should not be liable for the debts of the
" city of Memphis, is void that the same
"people and territory being reiucorporated
"under new name, the new municipality
sis but continuation of the old, and liza
g. BILE for its debts, Notwithstanding legis-
'slative declaration to the contrary" No
doubt the case will be taken to the United
States Supreme Court again, but there is
no probability that the latter Court will
show itself less scrupulous in matter of
obligation than the State Supreme Court
has been, and in fact there are many pre-
cedents in the United States Supreme
Court decisions which justify the belief
that it will sustain the judgment of the
State Court.
The debt of Memphis now amounts,
principal and interest, to $4,000. 600, and
this large debt, which the people of the
city thought they had evaded through
legal quibble, will now in all probability
have to be paid by them to the last dollar.
The method Yegorted to by Memphis for
escaping its just liabilities was shutting
and dishonest to the last degree. No man
in private life could resort to such trick
without forteiting what reputation he pos
sessed, and being thenceforth rated as
scoundrel There is no reason why NUM-
cipal corporation should do with impunity
what an individual could not do. The de-
cision of the State Supreme Court is COM
mon sense, to say the least. 1t is plain
enough that the law which substituted
Taxing District for the municipal corpora
tion was neither more nor less than piece
OF legerdemain, which produced no real
change in the situation. The people who
had incurred the debt remained precisely
where they had been, and they continued
in possession Of the same property. All
that had been done was to change the firm
name. Suppose now that mercantile cor
poration, being in debt, was to put up
sign bearing the name of Jones, Robinson
& Co., instead of the original firm name
of Smith, Brown & Co., and then should
decline to pay any Of the deb,s of the old
firm, on the ground that it had ceased to
exist How long would such fraud be
permitted to stand between the creditors
and their claims?
But merely because Memphis was city
instead OF private firm, many persons not
otherwise unintelligent appeared to think
that it could do what in any other circum-
starses would manifestly be a swindling
trick. The Court has now declared that
the change of name did not wipe on the
debts, and it is the most wholesome de.
cision that has been rendered for long
time. There was some ground for appre-
hension that the Courts were rather up
holding these municipal dishonesties, and
the effect of the former decisions was
shown in the growth of disposition to
emulate the conduct OF Memphis in other
parts OF the country. Nothing can so
quickly and surely dissipate immoral
tendencies of this kind as the declaration
of the Courts that devices Ike that OF
Memphis cannot be permitted to extinguish
legitimate obligations, and that the people
who as municipal corporations have in
Cured debts must find some sounder mode
of evasion than that practiced in this case.
The indications now are that the attempted
fraud of Memphis upon her creditors will
be very expensive experiment for her in
the long run, and if it is it will serve her
right.
The HARBoR COMMISSIONERS.
The report Of the expert who was COM
missioned to inspect the operations of the
Harbor Commission at San Francisco,
is somewhat peculiar one. The expert
appears to have found that everything was