The Iowa plain dealer. [volume] (New Oregon, Howard County, Iowa) 1867-1895, 1883-03-29
RICH MANS LAW AND POOR MANS
LAW
from the Chicago Tribune.l

from the Chicago Tnbune.l
In the report in which Senator Van
Wyck recommended the passage Of
law by which the Immigrant railroads
could be compelled to pay State and
local taxes on their imperial estates he
rave al, account Of the manner in which
recent decisions Of the Supreme Court
discriminate against settlers and in ia
vor Of corporations that calls for the
attentive consideration Of every lover Of
Justice and well-wisher OF the perpetui-
ty Of free institutions.
There are loo, 900, 900 acres held by
the Immigrant roads on which they
eyade the payment Of any taxes by the
device OF surveying and selecting land
only as 1t is sold, piece by piece. This
they are enabled to do by decision Of
the Supreme Court that q railroad
should not he taxed OH its land until
patent had been issued to it. The law
forbids the issue Of patent until the
corporation has paid the cost Of survey.
But the Supreme Court holds that an
has been issued to him. There il one
law for the corporation and another for
the citizen, it seems.
When the Union Pacific was given an
empire Of lands and bonanza Of bonds
that transcontinental road might he
built for the public benefit. it was slip
ulated i'll its charter that any Of its
lands not sold or disposed Of after the
road had been completed three years
should be open to presumption and set
Element at the Government price Of
$l.25 an acre Upon this sacred right
Of reversion to the public to prevent
perpetual monopoly Of these lands, the
Supreme Court based its decision that
the States should not be allowed to tax
these IMMIGRANTS. If they could be
if they could be sold for taxes the re-
versionary title Of the Government
would be obliterated So for, SO good,
for the Government--and the corpora
ton.
Settlers in search of homestaads, be-
lieving that the statute meant what it
said, and that the Supreme Court meant
what it said, and that they were living
under system which showed the same
benign respect to the rights Of the hum
BILE farmer as to those of the proudest
corporations, entered on these lands,
| relying in good faith on the integrity Of
the Government, paid their S1.25 an
acre. and built homes. But they were
evicted. How? BY a decision Of the
Supreme Court that the lands were
disposed Of" because they had been
covered by mortgage. When the
railroads wanted to evade the payment
Of taxes the Supreme Court decided for
them that their title was mot COM
pleted." When they wanted to tear
down the homes that had been put up
in reliance upon this decision that the
lands had not been disposed Of the SUI
preme Court decided for them that
their title was completed"
That the corporation, which was the
creature Of the Government and had
been created avowedlv for public bene-
tit. could by givinga mortgage or in any
other way take away the rights of the
Government or the people, who were
not parties to the mortgage, is the crea-
ton Of judicial servility only equaled
by that of the Pennsylvania Judges who
made their decisions under the dicta-
ton in open court of the attorneys of
the Standard Oil Company.
Thus, in 1872, the Supreme Court
decided that person who was q corpo-
ration could not be taxed on unpatented
land, but that person who was only
private citizen could be SO taxed, and
that the title of the roads was not COM
plete, because there was q public right
of entering on them if mot disposed
Of" And in 1878, when this right was
to be enforced, the court decided that
the land and the right had been dis
posed of together, by the act of the
corporation in giving mortgage on
land to which the same Supreme Court
had previously decided it had no title.
If the land was to he taxed the court
held the railroad had no title. But
though this title was good enough to
evict the settlers it has never been
good enough to permit the railroad to
be taxed. Only court that could so
rule could also decide that, though the
road had no title. it could mortgage the
property.
In the view of the court the question
whether the Union Pacific has title
depends altogether upon whether it is
to the interest of the road to have one
In its view, the people have rights
against the Union Pacific SO long as the
assertion of those rights can be inter-
posed to prevent the people, in their
State organizations, from compelling
the road to pay its just share toward
the expenses of government. But these
rights disappear when it is sought to
enforce them against the company.
Such facts need no rhetoric to set
them forth. But it is worth while to
ask the shrewd and strong gentlemen
who are using the courts and Congress
and the officers of the Government to
establish one law for rich syndicates
and another for simple citizens If they
have ever stopped to think that their
efforts are the beginnings of anarchy?
They are operating outside of their
rights rs citizens. They are violating
the rights of property. They are
wickedly appropriating the means of
livelihood of thousands by methods of
corruption. They are the revolutionary
class Of the country.
/ 1t is not really wise and shrewd for
few with great wealth 10 set this exam
! pie OF defiance Of the rights of prop
erty before the many with little wealth.
! Corruption at one end of the social
scale breeds violence ut the other. The
mass Of the prophetic great middle
class that tills the soil, administers the
professions. and directs indnstrv-are
sound and honest to the core. But il
they wish to avert the greatest social
calamity that ever overwhelmed nation
and save themselves from extermina-
ton between the upper jaw of Commu-
nisn by corruption and the neither jaw
Of Communism by violence, they must
rise to the emergency that is before
them. When Congress votes taxes on
the people for the benefit ofsyndicates,
when the highest court has one law for
the citizens and another for corpora
lions, when the executive departments
OF the Government, as, for instance,
the Land Office, are administered to
aid the few in their snoliation af TIM