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

the fall of 1885.
In fact, every ruling Of every Court
State or Federal-upon the question of
the California system of taxation since the
adoption of the Constitution of 1879, has,
in word or effect, constituted a rebuke of
that remarkable and impracticable docu-
ments discriminating theory of assessment
and taxation. 1t will always be source
| of pride with the RECORD UNION that it
| opposed the adoption Of the instrument,
| and pointed out its weaknesses and its rev.
dictionary character
1t is noteworthy that the chief law Off
Ger of the State, and who represented the
State as such in the cases Just decided,
though he did not commence the actions
or advise the assessments, is free to ex-
press himself of the opinion that the "new
Constitution" so far as regards its tax
| system, is in conflict with the Fourteenth
Amendment to the Federal Constitution.
The wisdom of his action in accepting the
rendered tax money from the railroad
| companies with the stipulated privilege of
appealing), and which money the short
sighted and stupid policy of other State
departments has prevented being covered
into the State Treasury, is, practically, by
the outcome of the cases Just decided, af-
firmed. Henow holds $685. of railroad
tax money in his hands, being the remain
der of much larger aggregate paid to him
by the railroad companies voluntarily, a
portion-some 0O00-having been
paid over by him to the Treasurers
of some of the counties willing
TO accept it. This $685. 900 is refused by
State officials, who must answer for their
conduct in preventing the people from en-
Toying its use. The Supreme Court now
decides that the companies never did and
do not owe the money, and therefore, if it
comes into State funds at all. it will be
because OF the waiver of de-
termined legal right, on the part of the
railroad companies. And in this humili-
ating position is the State placed, because
of the political scurrility heaped upon the
companies for seeking the common privi-
lege of having their legal rights deter
mined in the Courts of the land. 1t re-
mains to be seen if the same short-sighted
policy will be adhered to by the State
officers in question, that has been adopted
by them in the past regarding these
moneys.
1t is gratifying to know that the rail-
road companies do not stand before the
people as tax-shirkers. They pay their
taxes-the State loses nothing. The heavy
penalties claimed are not taxes; the Courts
hold that they cannot and ought not of
right to be collected. In being deprived
of this blood-money, therefore, the State is
shorn of nothing she ought to have, nor
Will she lose the taxation that of right the
companies ought under a proper assess
ment to pay. They have paid, SAYS their
attorney in an interview reported in the
San Francisco Chronicle, all the taxes COM
pretended in the suits, with the exception
of some cases where counties refused to
accept the tender. The whole amount I'M
paid out of over 81 100000 does not exceed
SlS0,000. All that was involved in the
cases were the five per cent. delinquent
taxes and part of the attorneys fees, not
exceeding 100000 in all He adds: "The
present state of the controversy is that we
will not be compelled to pay attorneys
fees or penalties. We will make
the tender, before refused, of the taxes not
paid in Santa Clara and Los Angeles
counties"
1t remains to be noted that the cry has
already been put afoot that the Supreme
Court has decided the cases upon a mere
technically" (as that word is popularity
accepted, and just as popularity misinter
preted). This will be harped upon to the
utmost by those whose political aspirations
are dependent upon their ability to antag
onize the people and the railroad com
panies. But calm consideration will dis
abuse the impartial mind of this idea
Nothing is better settled, and no principle
of the law has profounder reason under.
lying it, than this, that in the taxation Of
the property of the citizen, and for pay.
ment of which it may be distrained, every
affirmative detail of the process of assess
ing and taxing must be strictly observed
Were this not so the property of no mar
would be safe, and the rights of the citi
zen could be placed at the mercy of caprice
neglect and incompetency. Where there
is the slightest deviation from prescribed
methods of assessment and taxation, the
whole process is brought to .standstill
and is invalid. The law wisely saw,
that this right of the sovereign to take
portion of the goods of the citizen for the
common use, being an extraordinary
though necessary power, and one of the
highest attributes of sovereignty, must be
exercised strictly within constitutional
and statutory limits and reservations. ANY
departure from these breaks link in the
chain of title to be given if property is
seized and sold for taxes, and results in an
unjust seizure and the invasion of char
tered rights. Every requirement in the
process up to final legal confiscation must
be strictly observed, for any other rule
would result in endless confusion and I'M
lawful despoiling.
1t is not technical therefore, to re
quire that assessments shall be made in
exact conformity with the law. Techni-
cality implies the use of or adhesion to the
terms of an art or science, but to require
conformity with express provisions of
law as condition precedent to stated
ends, is not technicality in the popular
sense, for it involves the very essence of
the law, the liberty of the citizen. the
right to lawfully possess and enjoy pror-
erty and the right of the State to seize. and
! dispossess him of guaranteed rights. 1t will