Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1882-07-26
THE RAILROAD TAXES.

District Attorney Smith returned from
San Francisco last Tuesday evening, with.
out having completed the compromise in
the railroad tax suits. Having been d.
rected by order of the Board of Supervisors
to effect compromise with the railroad
company by having judgments entered in
the two cases in the United States Circuit
Court for amounts agreed upon between
the Board and the railroad company, he
appeared in the Circuit Court on Monday,
two weeks ago, which was the day set for
the hearing of motions to remand the two
cases back to our Superior Court. The
motions were temporarily withdrawn, in
order to have the judgments entered in
favor of the county on the compromise
basis; but in reading the pleadings Judges
Field and Sawyer, contrary to all expecta-
tions, intimated that the Circuit Court had
no jurisdiction to try the cases, and Dis.
trict Attorney Smith, believing that the
Circuit Judges would remand the two
cases back to our Superior Court for
trial, and that il they should be remanded
a more speedy determination of them
would be had and in that event it
might not be well to compromise, he ac-
cordingly submitted the compromise on the
condition that if the Circuit Court retained
the cases judgment might be entered in &C.
cordance with the compromise, but if the
| cases should be remanded to our Superior
Court the compromise should be an after
| consideration. The decision of the ques.
ton was to have been given last Monday,
but the argument of the motions to remand
them came up in the cases of four other
counties, and the Court withheld its ruling
in our cases, to be made with all the cases
together. Three days were occupied by
many of the ablest lawyers of the State in
the arguments of the motions pro and con
upon the question of the jurisdiction of the
United States Circuit Court. The argu-
ments were concluded last Tuesday,
but the attorneys were allowed time
to file briefs, and 1t is not
likely that decision will be reached until
next week, and Mr.. Smith thinks that the
Circuit Judges will rule in favor of remand.
ing the cases back to the Superior Courts,
holding that although the Federal ques.
tions raised by the railroad company might
entitle them to take the cases from the State
Supreme Court to the United States Su.
preme Court, they are not such as to entitle
them to be first tried in the Federal Courts.
But the railroad attorneys say that if the
Circuit Court should order the cases re.
manded to the Superior Court the railroad
company would appeal from the order to
the Supreme Court of the United States.
If they should, which is quite likely, even
the commencement of the trial of the cases
would have to wait an indefinite time upon
the decision Of the United States Supreme
Court, and would place us further than
ever from the end. The railroad company
are still willing to compromise SO
long as public opinion is favorable,
and will agree to have our cases
returned to our Superior Court at once,
and have Judgment entered here in &C.
cordance with the compromise, and from
appearances that would be the best thing
that could be done. The Kern county
cases were at the head of the calendar,
and could be tried earlier than any of the
other tax cases, but it is evident that the
railroad company could wear us out be.
fore the end could be reached, especially
as the State Board of Equalization, which
is the constitutional authority to fix a
standard of right has deprived US of the
basis upon which we started to fight the
railroad company, and by their last assess.
| ment has given the railroad company the
argument that if we compromise we shall
receive the same taxes for the three years
of 1881, 1882 and 1883, according to the
standard of valuation last fixed by that
Board, which is consistent and uniform
for those three years and greater
than ever before received, and if the
county should continue the prosecution
of the cases, to say nothing of the
delay and expense, we could not claim to
be fighting for more than the technicality
that because the State Board had once
said that the valuation of the road was
Sl4,0 900 and SIG, 500 per mile, and no mat.
ter how much they might contradict that
assessment, and however much we must
be bound by the law that according to
their last assessment the taxes for 1882 3
should be upon valuation of $40, 500 per
mile, still we must litigate with the rail-
road company forever for a tax at the
rates of Sl4, 600 and SIG, 500 per mile, sim.
ply because the State Board fixed those
valuations for the fiscal years 1891 and
1882. We doubt the ability of the people
to beat the railroad company on such a
technicality. The fight of the people
must ever be upon moral principles, and
without trick or subterfuge. Without
principle they have no power, and exact.
ing Justice of all, they have no right nor
have they any reason to enforce wrong OF
to acquire a right by wrongful MEANS
lkern County Gazette, July 22d.