The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1881-01-26
The Right 10 Sue O City.
iChurlOi,r CbScrrcr.

iChurlOic Observer.
\ decision recently rendered by the STU
prr:ne Court NJ Washington. z iCs Ia settle ~
question about which there las been II O. oil
deal of controversy In the prst. II checks the
practice of rcsorting to circuit courts FL tie
collection Of city and county debts, ana de-
i'niI c "sr% siS"Ta 9s sIssssee more 1T th %S" "r:
binary Interest kps OF Charlotte just
pow In view or Ions that vii! "risr
city ii : Of "S"ri"',S 81 Ep '%e%s i"! !, % %' tho mo-
direct brarirg on nSkSe so far az the nrtua!
decision is concerned. The case just decided
went np from Memphis, and Is described X
Mrrriwrtlcr against Garrett. The leading
proportions established are summarized as
follows:
|. The property which y city holds for public
use. such us public bn'ldin -. streets. parks,
wl.arvcs, fret ngincS. and the likc-whn.evrr
it holds for administration of government
caunGt re seized by creditors. 1t would bring
government to an end to allow sh"rinS to
seize and sell the means by which 1t Is admin
i.tcirl.
.. Private property OF individuals living
within n city cannot he seized to pay city
debts. The law Of one or two Of III" states nj
al law OF the land. The proper way for com
polling inhabitants of II city 10 contribute to-
ward the payment Of It's debts Is by u jTs: and
equal taxation of all-noL by scizin. the entire
property of II few.
3. The levy and c0llccticn Of n tnX 10 pay q
ci!y'S d. BIT is wholly sahjccl to the direction OF
the LEGISLATURE of The Stale. ThetaX cannot
bc collected through Il receiver appointed ly n
C. ,ilrt. In cOniInveniinn Of the lr: i>latire Will.
n the present instancclt wa perfectly l. wflil
for the Legislature nf Tennessee to rcpeal tie
charter Of Mcini hi and 10 prescribe {. new
mode for the collection of taxes. After IL did
sn, the new mode was the only one 10 pursue.
Those who deal with elites or counties do so
on the Implied understanding that tie G.c=is.
laiure ran altar the municipal arrangements
If il sees tit.
The history of The case Is not without inter-
est, This l. condensed from 4 engthy tate
mrnt0 or the case In the Veg YORK I. th6He. II
Is generally known that the city of Memphis
being unable to meet its obligations incurred
by issuing bonds Tor railroads, street improve
incntS, water works. &c, hcctinc inSOIvent.
The holders Of her bonds brought SnitH-scv-
G. al of irem In the Federal Courts; and these
courts commenced proceedings tn compel IN"
levy of larger taxes. Vita taxes linCollcctcd,
debts maturing, numerous suits commenced
and more threatened, credit gone, and the
property of citizens over nurdrilrl, The fiscal
condition of the city wns nearly "leless.
The Stn:c intrrtrrtd IN her behalf; and, Just
two years ago repealed the city charter, to *
charge Of the public property OF fl" city, and
and applying them TO the discharge of the
city d"l'rs. The day before this c. artmcnt-
and probably In hnp' 10 forrSi"llil IT, Garrett
and other hoIGc's OF city bonds brought suit
theory that lie C 'tS corporation held rs rnp-
erty and It's rislit to collect LAKES 10 trust for
the benefit or city crrditors; mat u hnd neg
lectcd its duty a-trustr"; and tia the Circuit
Court might and shOull compel the duty to
be performed. The , lrcnit Court aplnin'c cd Il
receiver, and directed him TO take Possession
of all assets Of the city of Memphis with
some specified exceptions of streets, pubic
squares, hospitals, pro, ETY. OF the fire and pc
lice departments. ctr..) also IF al the safes.
books, papers, Office furniture, ETC.,, in the pub
lie Offices, and to collect taxes due to the city.
MS well AZ rents and other moneys Tie valid
ity of this order raS The principal matter In
question before the Supreme Court, and the
decision is adverse to It.