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

somewhat difficult to define with preei-
sion so as to cover all cases. II IS suiii-
Gent TO observe here. that by 'due
process Of law" Is meant one which Is
appropriate to the case aud Just to the
parties to be affected. But Judge Ross
held the act IN question provides for the
assessment and sale, and thus tue tar
ing Of private property, without aiiord'
ing the owner any opportunity TO- be
heard in opposition TO the validity
OF the proceedings and hence the taxing
OF the property was without due pro-
cess Of law. Let US see whether this IS
a correct construction OF the law or
not2
Since our English ioreia,hers wfested
from King John the constitutional guar
anty, which has come down to us from
Magma Charia, wherein It IS declared
that no person shall be deprived OF lie,
liberty or property, except by the judg-
ment Of his peers or the law Of the land,
the alternative provisions oil this guar
anty have. by some, been held to mean
the same thing, and the guaranty itself
to entiuc every person TO have any de-
mand, Of whatsoever nature, made upon
him submitted to the determination Of
a Judgment Of Jury.
Undoubtedly, In eases.where life aud
liberty are Involved, due process OF law
requires that there be a regular course
oil judicial proceeding which imply that
the party to be affected shall have
notice aud an opportunity to be heard.
But IN tax cases the rule Is otherwise,
as so held by the United States Supreme
court IN a number Of cases. aud by the
great pre- ponderanee OF other authority.
Such a construction In these cases would
work a thorough and radical change In
the principles on which taxation now
rests. Where the taking Of the proper.
ty is the enforcement OF tax, the pro-
ceeding Is necessarily less formed. The
necessity OF revenue for the support Of
the government does not admit OF the
delay attendant upon the long drawn
out proceedings In court OF Justice.
Were this so Il would sometimes cripple,
and ia other cases do away with the
legislative powers, and subject the &c.
ton Of that department whose function
1t Is to make the laws according to It's
own views Of the questions vi public In.
terest and public policy, to a review and
In many cases reversal at the hands OF
a Jury. II would not so much strength.
en- the judicial department as II would
weaken the legislative.
II has long been settled that while one
is to be protected In his interests by the
claw OF the land" he has right to the
judgment OF his peers, only In those
cases which II has immemofialy existed,
or In which II has been expressly grant.
ed by law. The clause referred to from
Magma Charta, does not imply the ne.
cessity or right for judicial action In
every case Ia which the property oil a
person may be taken by means OF tax
or assessment. On the contrary legis-
laiive act Tor that purpose is Of itself the
Jaw OF the land. Aud an act providing
for levying taxes or assessments, as Is the
case in the question before US, and pro.
viding the means OF enforcement Is the
claw OF the land" aud within the UNI
questioned and unquestionahle power
OF the legislature TO enact. This Is 50
not merely In SO FAR as IL lays down a
general fule to be observed, but also in
all proceedings and all the processes
which Il points out or provides ior levy.
ing the tax and enforcing It's collection
even II the property has TO be sold
to affect the same.
Since the adoption Of XIV amend.
ment to the Federal constitution, when
ever II is claimed that a revenue or tax
law, either In intent or In its administra.
ton, deprives the owner OF his property