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

with the Fourteenth Amendment Of IL
federal Constitution. AS far as the eff;e,
OF the decision is concerned, there is OH
result that plainly see: 1t leaves no PFC
vision tor the collection of taxes .his yea
from the railroad company. The Board q
Equalizatfon, which Will meet in August
! VIII not have the right under this decision
| 10 levy an assessment on the railroa,
| properly, ard | can see no way out Of tia
uilhcnlty except by the calling of an extr.
session OF the Legislature to provide 70
! The contingency. If that is not done. n,
taxes tor 1887 caa be levied. | suppose th
railroad people will pay the same proper
hon OF this years taxes To me-namely. g.
| per cent-as they did last year, which vii
isaye IN my possession about 81 100000
FROM the manner and conversation of tn,
attorney General, it was inferred that h,
regarded the decision OF the SEpreme Cour
as personal triumph. in that it vindicateC
MS |eoginent in accepting the face value o.
| me taxes from the railroads in the Circuit
| Courtr when the present decision hold:
| tnat none OF II was colleetsble for the rea
son th'at 1t was erroneously assessed
Ihe Attorney-General stated that he had
| nothlng to do with the assessments. anC
| dld not advise the manner IN which they
should be levied. He did not commence
| the actions, and claims that he is in no way
responsible for the outcome. Concerning
an extra session of the Legislature. the
Attorney General, who is sterling Demo.
crat, said " Bossed by gang of barking
scoundrels that it is, il would be impotent
The next Legislature will be Republican
and might be expected to have sufficient
| intelligence TO frame law. But the Cali
fornia Democrat, Of the stripe that we SEE
nowadays is no better than beast Won.
der how Delmas, Dunn and that gang fee
tonight over this decision If it had moi
| been for the fact that | accepted the money
Ior taxes from The railroad with the priyi.
lHge of appealing, where would the State
be tonight? I've got $S05. .000 in nv pos.
| session, and the County Treasurers have
$250,000 more which the State NAV have
just as soon as the Courts compel Dunn to
take it. The railroad will probably pay me
about 100000 more for the taxes of 1885
This would make about 81 100000 that the
State would have been clean out of pocket
II had listened to those yelping idiots"
The full face value of the taxes of 1881
50 were paid to you, was it not2"
Yes, every cent; all that was not paid
was the 2 per cent. interest, per cent
penalty and the 10 per cent. attorneys fees
For the years 1SS3-S4 the railroad paid in
90 per cent. of the face value, as the COM
pany alleged that it had been assessed 4O
per cent. in excess of real value"
What are you going To do with the
money!"
~ am going to keep it, by pr an
swered the General. II have SS05, 600 il
my hands, and the State officers can take
it or leave it, just as it suits their fancy.
don't propose to bother myself about il
It's just question of getting this much OF
9TH oil IL
shall keep it. am not troubled about it
The Supreme Court of the State is to decide
very soon whether this money belongs to
the State or not. Controller Dunn claims
that because ! didn't get the whole of the
tax, what | did get does not belong to the
State. Very we'll he and the Supreme
Court can fix it up TO suit themselves. Oh.
yes | suppose the railroad company is
willing to pay as much next year as they
did this, without even any tax levy at all
but if they can't get anybody to take il
what's the use?'' and the Attorney General
made the air sulphurous for about five
minutes.
JUDGE A. L. RHODES.
A. L. Rhodes, ex-Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court of California, who was en-
ployed by the Governor to assist the State
IN the cases says:
" am sorry the decision was made sim
ply on State question, for was anxious
to have the United states Supreme Court
pass upon the questions involving the con-
stitutionality of the present revenue sys-
tem."
Do you think that a case can be ar,
ranged and carried to the Supreme Court
of the United States simply on constitu-
tional questions? ?h
No, think not. The railroad would
not allow any case to be confined simply to
that issue. The assessments in controversy
during the various years have all been OF
such Il character as to give rise to these side
issues on State questions. The railroad
would not hesitate to use these points. and
from the decision before us, that tribunal
would decide the case on the State issue
and ignore the constitutional proposi-
tons"
g Do you think that the Court ignored
the constitutional points for the reason
that there were grave doubts on both
sides?"
do, most emphatically. l think that
there was division among the Judges, and
for that reason they deferred the rendering
OF judgment on the constitutional points
involved"
JAMES A. WAYMIRE
One of the States attorneys, regretted that
the constitutional points had not been de-
cided
Do you think that the railroad can re-
cover any of the money it paid under those
assessments covered by the decision ?''
No, do not think it can. The money
was voluntarily paid under tender and it
cannot recover. Besides, do not think it
desires to do so. All it wants to avoid is
the payment of the penalties and the at
torneys' fees"
"What will become of the money now in
Attorney General MarshalPs hands?"
There is an application before the Su-
preme Court of the State now pending for
a writ TO compel the Controller of the
State to accept the money which has been
received by Attorney General Marshall. I
think the Supreme Court will grant the
writ, and compel the Controller to take the
money"
u. NJ. DELMAs.
d. NJ. Delmas, the Controllers and Gov
ernor's appOntee in the cases. was greatly
affected.
What do they mean by the assessment
of improvements | cannot understand
the decision
How does it affect the controversy in
the other cases ?''
g ! have nothing to say about the mat
ter
Mr.. Delmas' mind then reverted to the
assessment of improvements
If, said he, the Improvements were
enormously assessed, why were those assess
ments not segregated from the main assess
ments. and the latter held to be valid ?'
1t Mr. Delmas has read the opinion of the
Court, he has found an answer to his cues
tons and his perplexity.
JOHN L. LOVE.
City and County Attorney OF San Fran
cisco Love, when questioned regarding the
decision, stated there WAS one thing which
it showed, and that was that Attorney
General Marshall was quite right when he
accepted the principal of the taxes from the
railroad, in defiance of the Judgment of
Delmas, Dunn and others. The decision
not only vindicates Marshall, but covers
with ridicule the proceedings of the Stock
ton Convention and its wild trades If
Marshall had not accepted the 81 200 GOO
from the railroad as the principal of the
taxes, the railroad. if it SO desired, could