Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1882-04-03

OF this Board. without regard TO the forms 10
which that viii is expressed, without regard
to the evidence by which it arrives at its con-
clusiep, without regard to the place or time
at which it acts, is the law of the lard;
IT POSSESSES SUPREME AND ABSOLUTE POWER
Over all the property under its jurisdiction.
It may virtually exempt such property from
may confiscate it. We maintain that such
power vested 10 any tribunal is incompatible
with the existence of republican institutions,
and that its exercise would be subversive of
the principles which underlie our form of
government. We assert without fear of sue
cessful contradiction that from the time Of
the establishment by James II. of the
High Commission to the time Of the crea-
tion Of the Board Of Equalization in Cali
fornis, no tribunal has existed either in Eng
land or America which even claimed the right
TO deal with life. liberty or property, subject
to no rules except those of its own pleasure.
Nearly two centuries have elapsed since the
power to deprive q person of property except
10 accordance with the general laws of the
land, has been asserted il any country where
the English language is spoken. It is true
that in some States laws exist for tie ascer-
tanning of
THE VALUE OF RAILROAD PROPERTY
By tribunals differently constituted from the
tribunals which ascertain the value of other
property, but such tribunals have jurisdiction
over all railroad property. They must pro-
cesd upon notice the manner of their pro-
cesding is regulated by laws analogous 60 TIE
laws governing other tribunals exercising like
powers laws which throw around such prop
erty every protection which the laws of the
land give to property in general. l. is against
this system, under q claim to the protection
of general laws, that the railroad company has
taken its stand It relies for its justification
upoI the ightfulness oft cause, upon decisions
of.the Courts which will be pronounced when
the case shall be heard upon its merits, and
upon the enlightened judgment of people
jealous of those rights which government was
ordained to protect and preserve.
MONEY TENDERED.
! The railroad company seeks in this mat
ter to violate no obligation which it owes to
the public Il the performance Of the great
Office which it has taken upon itself, to pro-
t tect the property of its hareholders-whose
/ trustee il is against the exercise of unlawful
power-i5 has kept itself clear of the mere
question of dollars and cents by rendering to
| every county more than once q tax in excess
Of that paid by other citizens of the same
county upon their property. Nor will the
! company stop at this, but in each case which
has been or shall be brought against it, it will
! for ike purpose waive ali question Of the
| legality of the tax, and agree that judgment
may go against it for a tax upon "a valuation
higher than was ever affixed to such property
in the United States. It does this ia the
consciousness that the class to which you
refer is standing anxiously by seeking to
make political capital out Of any false step
that the company might make in the prem
| i5es. II does this in discharge of
FouUTARTF oRrIc ATOMS
| Although there bs no law to compel their
! performance. 1t has paid to San Diego
| county S25, 600, not because it has been as
ssssed, bat because, if assessed, there would
| be that much due to the county. The Di-
rectors of the company never will until they
have the judgment Of the highest tribunal in
the land, allow one dollar of the property of
! the stock ckhoideIs, whose trustees they are, to
be taken from its treasury in violation of the
fundamental laws of the lard. They will pay
to the counties, even if the company be sue
cessful in this litigation, tax for the last
two fiscal years, which, beyond all question,
will exceed the amount legally chargeable
against them. Ita Directors appreciate the
value of an enlightened public opinion to aid
them in the discharge of onerous duties, ard
none more than they feel the Importance of
beiog right. To the end that such aid may be
secured against the arbitrary power con-
f5rred upon this State Beard Of Equalization
the railroad company comes into the Courts
of the ceuutry and interpOses as q shield be-
tween the property of its stockholders and
the assaults Of arbitrary power.
THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION DEPENDED or.
The provisions of Section of the Four
teenth Amendment to the Federal Con
stitution declares that, ''No State shsll
make or enforce any law which shall abridge
Z l., nf ~, Is
the United States, nor shall any State de-
| prive any person OF life, liberty or property
without due process of law, nor deny to any
person within its jurisdiction the equal pro-
tection of the law"
This may be summed up in a single SEN
tence {" The equality of ALL whether itch or
poor, high or low, before the law" Nor
shall any State deprive any person Of life,
liberty or property without due process of
| law. Such is the language of the amend
ment, and it applies to the action OF the
State, whether the State speaks through her
legislative assembly or through her people in
their original capacity; whether through Acts
Of the Legislature or by the voice of consti-
tutional ensctments. The principle embedded
in the clauae quoted. says Mr.. Justice Nc
Kee, "Underlies sll forms of government by
law. The Legislature tthe Statei
has no power to take away mans property,
nor can it authorize its agents to do so, with
out first providing for personal notice to be
given TO him, and for a full opportunity of
time, place and tribunal.
TO BE HEARD IN DIFESsE
or his rights. This constitutional guaranty
| is not confined to judicial proceedings, but
extends 20 every case in which citizen may
be deprived of life, liberty or property,
whether the proceedings be judicial, admins.
f-at tiya or iva in, fAc nI, - Anl
Mr. Justice Aickinstry in the same case
(SIulligan vs. SMITH holds that any system
of taxation which does ros pyoyids for notice
or process by means Of which the property
og1ers are to be subjected 10 the Judgment
of the tribunal which fixes the tax or assess
N ant is V, i'd
Says Earl, Justice. in the well reasoned
case OF Stu'rtVs. Palmer "a n. Y, 1911:
1t is difficult to defiae with precision the exac.
meaning and scope Of the phrase, due process of
law" ANY definition which could ne given would
probably fail TO comprehend ail the to which
it would ep'ly. l. is probably wiser. AZ recently
stated by Mr.. Justice Miller, Of the United States
Supreme Court, to leave the meaning to be evolved
"by the gradual proc IS OF judical inclusion and
exclusion, as the case presented for decision shall
require, with the reasoning On which such decis
ions shall be founded Davidson ys Board of
Administrators Of New Orleans, II Albany Law
. Journal 23.) II may, however he stated generally
that due process of law requires orderly pro-
ceednc adapted to the nature OF the case in which
the citizen has opportunity to be heard ard to
defend, enforce and protect his rights 4 hearing
or an opportunity TO be heard, is absolutely essen
tisl. We cannot conceive Of due process of law
without this.
The learned Judge, continuing says:
In Ireland w. City OF Rochester (51 Barb, 40
Judge James c. Smith, speaking of the imposition
Of assessments says; II the nature of a Judi
cial proceeding against them and its effect is to
take their property for public use 1t is a
plain principle o justice applicable to all judicial
proceedings that no person shsN be condemned or
shall suffer judgment against him without an OPP
portunity TO be hesrI - and he says that an Act
assessing persons without notice transeends the
power Of the Legislature and Is itself void In the
matter Of Ford (6 Lans., 92), Judge Gilbert says
that the duties OF Assessors in making assessments
are OF judicial nature, and that "it is funda-
mental rule that in all judicial or quasi judicial
proceedings whereby the citizen may be deprived Of
his property, he shall have notice and an onportu
nifty Of hearing before the proceedings can become
ettectua" That Assessors act jndicially See also
BaIhyte vs.. Shepherd (35 \. Y, 23S) and Clark vs.
Norton (49 n. Y, 243) In overing VS. Foote Cos n
/ Y, S6S). Mr.. Commissioner Reynolds SAYS The
general theory under laws for taxation Of prop
erty is that the citizen to be affected must have
some sort OF notice Of the proceedings to be had
against his property, and that In form he may
be heard, il wrong is Gpprehended, before any por
on Of his estate is seized for the support Of Gov
I crnment"
OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD.
Judge Earl. in the same opinion, quotes