Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1895-10-05

without "the process OF law" federal
question Is raised upon which the deci-
sion OF the Supreme court Of the United
States will be authoritative and coneh-
siye. And, II has been decided by that
court, IN many cases. that "due pro
cess OF law did not require judicial
proceedings IN enforcing tax, McMil-
Ian vs. Anderson, IS U, 5. 81; Davidson
cs New Orleans 70 U >. 81; Hayes Va
Reclamation District III u. S. 7oI.
as one OF the greatest constitutional
lawyers In the United States, Mr.. Thos.
NJ Cooley, IN referring to this class OF
cases, saws: These cases settle very
conelusively the construction OF the
fourteenth amendment, and decide that
the federal courts have no general juris-
diction to prevent oppression under
state tax laws, nor to give relief against
hardships and inequalities In their work
ings."
Surely such construction Of the
statute as given by Mr.. Justice Ross was
never contemplated when the iourteetn
amendment was adopted.
The second point that argue Ia. Its
contended that the property taken Is
not ior public purpose. That IL Is
essential In tax cases; that the purpose
to be accomplished must be public In its
nature. Is conceded by all.
The purpose Tor which properly may
be acquired and money realized under
the act IN question Is Tor the expense Of
organization Of the district, the cunstruc.
ton and maintenance Of plans and
canals, and the payment Of the principal
and interest on bonds issues by the
district.
1t will be noticed that section "a OF the
act provides that The use Of all water
required for irrigation OF the lands OF
any district formed under the provisions
OF the act, together with the rights OF
way Tor canals and bitches. sites for res
.rvoirs, and all other property required
in fully carrying out the provisions OF
the act, is hereby declared a public use,
subject to the regulations and conuol Of
this state, In the manner prescribed by
law.
1t will also be noticed that each land
owner In q district Is to receive his
proportion Of all waters distributed Tor
irrigation which he may use or dispose
OF Ms he may see fit, that this legal title
TO all property acquired under this act
shall vest IN such irrigation district, and
shall be held by such district IN trust
Tor, and Is dedicated and set apart to the
uses and purposes set forth In the act.
Bearing IN mind the above provisions
OF the statute We now come to the queS.
ton, what Is public use or pufpostp
For the most part the terms public
purpose" or "public use" are employed
In the same sense In the law Of taxation,
as they are In the law OF eminent do.
main. An appropriation under the
right OF eminent domain Is only forced
sale which Is made for the public good,
ior just compensation 10 the owner so
that no Injustice results to him whose
property Is appropriated. On the other
hand, no pecuniary consideration is paid
when money IS demanded under the
powers Of taxation. Aud II the property
should be taken IN order TO be anpro.
pfiated to a private purpose, instead OF
public one, the benefits which the tax
payers might be presumed to receive
from ITS beng used ior the needs OF the
government, to enable il to protect and
defend him, TO make public improve.
Enthusiastically increasing the value OF
his property-an TO give him the oene-
fits Of organized society IN common with
its other citizens, are not realized. and
In such case the consideration for give
ing up the property wholly fails. Hence
a more liberal consideration OF public
purpose" Is advisable in the law OF emf.