The weekly Floridian. [volume] (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1867-19??, 1882-07-04

The Supreme Court, as our readers are
aware, have had under consideration for
the past two weeks the question of tax
exemption which several railroad compa-
MES claim in our State. In the argument
Judge G. A. Stanley represented the
Louisville and Nashville Railroad Com
pany and General f. A. Perry the State,
this being merely test case.
A decision favorable to the State would
comport with the views of the able
thinkers and jurists of Florida, and would
furnish the treasury with what the people
believe its just dues.
The legal presentation, as made by
General Perry, will not be uninteresting
an argument, in our own mind, unan-
swerable. 1t will be remembered that in
the case of Sullivan vs. Gonzalez FLORIDA
Reports) the court decided that the Leg
islature of 1855 intended to exempt the
property of the Alabama and Florida
Railroad Company, the predecessor of the
Louisville and Nashville Railroad Com
pany, from taxation. General Perry, in
Difference to this authority, would not
press an opposite argument, but con-
tended that the Legislature of 1855 did
not possess the constitutional power to
carry out its intention, and that therefore
Section Is of the Internal Improvement
Act is unconstitutional.
The Constitution then in force employs
this language: "The General Assembly
shall devise and adopt a system of rev.
enue, having regard to an equal and uni
torn mode of taxation to be general
throughout the State" This clause, il
was contended, precluded the. Legislature
from doing that which would destroy
such uniformity as, was contemplated by
the organic law That the motive of the
Legislature was praiseworthy cannot
affect the question, proposition upheld
by our own Supreme Court and other
State courts, and even if the Alabama
and Florida Road were exempt, the ex-
emption was not inherited by the Pensa-
cola and Louisville, the Pensacola, and
then by the foreign corporation, the
Louisville and Nashville Company
The General then concluded with show
ing the court that doubt exists AZ TO
this special exemption, and if so, under
decision of the United States Supreme
Court, such doubt should be given the
State
We cannot do better than by quoting
his own words: "Only by this courts
decision for the State, pro forma, though
it be considered, can all possibility of Ill
innate wrong be avoided and right be f.
nally determined. This court has the
power to prevent the question from reach
ing that final appellate tribunal, but is
there not danger that by the exercise of
that power it may be the possible instru-
ment of perpetuating what the people of
Florida claim land are ready to aver and
prove before that final arbiter) to be, not
a forever binding contract by which duly
empowered agents have bartered away
a sovereign attribute to be passed from
hand to hand like an ordinary chattel,
without let or hindrance Of the State, and
finally to be held and enjoyed by for
eign corporation, but an unrighteous in
equality, the offspring of legislative usur-
patton, maintained by selfish and soul
less disregard of that great principle
which has been embodied in every Flor
ida Constitution, that the burden of taxa
ton shall be equally and uniformity i'm
posed upon all who enjoy the protection
of government"