Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1886-05-12

| Interviews have been held by several
| journals in San Francisco with different
attorneys to these tax suits. From these
| we extract the salient points
Colonel Raymond says the case lust de-
cided went Up on the point that the State
! Board of Equalization included in the
assessment property which it had no right
to assess; that the illegal part of the assess
ment was not severabie, and therefore the
whole tax failed The decision involved
no loss whatever to theState or counties. as
1t only refers to the taxes for the fiscal wears
of 1881, 1889 and 1888. in which the taxes
either had been paid in full or rendered to
the counties, and that all the taxes have
been received except about S1S0,0OO. The
main question in this case was whether the
Federal Courts had jurisdiction, and
whether the Fourteenth Amendment was
applicable to taxation or not. These points
had been decided In the Los Angeles county
| tax cases. In regard to the collection of
| taxes in the future from the railroad COM
pany, the Board of Equalization, which
meets in August, can levy an assessment
and obvlate these decisions. The Legis-
lature, at its last session, passed the
Heath amendment, which provided for a
tax of y per cent. on the gross proceeds of
the companies, in lieu of all other taxes
that this amendment was not submitted TO
the people, owing to the fact that the Gov
ernor had not approved of the bill provid-
ing that a special election be called for its
submission. The Legislature, however,
anticipating that the Governor would not
approve this bill, although he had an
nounced himself in favor of that system of
taxation, provided by an amendment to
the amendment that the taxes for 1884 and
1885 should not be invalidated bv the
amendment. If the amendments is adoptcd
by the people at the next general election,
the taxes for the last year are fully bro
vided for.
Mr.. Raymond said also that if this
amendment was adopted the whole confro-
versy would be settled. The railroad in
this State, he said had paid more in taxes
than is within the capacity of any railroad
to earn that when this matter first came
up they had agreed with Mr. Rhodes, the
attorney for the State, to submit the whole
matter upon the San Mateo county case on
the simple question whether tax could be
legally levied under the new Constitution.
The State officers and attorneys changed
their minds and claimed that that case was
an exclusive one and a fraud Then these
cases were tried, and, of course, the attor-
neys for the railroad made the best point
they could as shown by the decision of the
Supreme Court
The great drawback to this taxation
controversy between the railroad and the
State" he said, was that it was made a
political fight. The railroad has all along
desired to pay its taxes, but ON basis that
| 1t thought just and proper. | am satisfied
with the decision, and am glad it was made
on the State issue mentioned in the dis
patch. When this fight was started four
years ago, it was made on our side for the
purpose of reversing what is known as the
slaughter-house cases. By these cases it
was held that State might, by legislative
act, grant to corporation the power to 10
all the slaughtering for a great city like
New Orleans, and might thereby exclude
from that business every one but the per
son to whom the franchise was granted.
l held that under the Fourteenth Amend
| ment to the Federal Constitution. the Leo
islature ola State could not by law which
it passed give to any person rights which
| under the same terms and conditions
were not opened to all persons within
the jurisdiction of the State, and as a cor
relative proposition, could not impose any
burdens upon one class of citizens. or :,
corporation, which it did not under similar
| circumstances impose upon all or in
| other words that any special legislation
was prohibited by the amendment To
apply the principle to the railroad tax
| cases, II meant that all property of the same
class within the State must be assessed and
| taxed alike, and that the State could if IT
pleased, impose an income tax in lieu of an
| ad yalorem tax, but the income tax mast
apply equally to all classes of property
upon which it is imposed To simmer the
whole matter down, our contest has been
| made under the Constitution, which saws
| that all must stand equal before the laws.
| do not regret that the Supreme Court has
not decided the constitutional points in
volyed in these railroad tax cases, for be-
lieve that, in several decisions rendered in
| the October term. the principles for which
We contended were fully established. The
decisions made at the October term. con-
STRUNG the Fourteenth Amendment. settled
forever the questions which were discussed
before the Civil War, and determines that
| the power of the Federal Government will
| always be invoked against the States &C.
| ton when that action invades the domain
Of those rights which are declared to be in
! alienable."
ATToRNEy-GENERAL MARSHALL
Says: was opposed to the new Constitu-
| ton on the ground that the clause relating tc
railroads, in which there is discrimination
against mortgages, was fatal aud in coaiiict