Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1898-08-03

alton the amount 4 interest would ~
course b. less by just the cNactlon OF
the county through itr assessor ana |
collector and it amounts at times to
quite an Item. Al this has reference 20 |
home money. there being no tax collect |
cd on money loaned here from orislin |
the state: ana the apparent injustice |
OF the discrimination was also grouno |
OF objection. W1iviug the latter
phase OF the case. and referring oni}
90 the formar-.whlch 10 done for o.
sake OF citation mcrciy-thcre ORE
some other things suggested by thrcon.
nocilon.
a majority of the 1crirlaturc was de-
cldedly favorable 10 the measure. and 70
would doubilcss have passed with some
lilng approaching urenimlty but Coz
Che insurmoun,nbo obstacle which au
inycHtration OF the matter disclosed.
The blll was Unconstitutional The
charter q the state provides. amons
other things on that subject thar ~
private property On the State ls subject
90 taxation and Mortgage are held 10
bc such property. which ihey mdoubt-
ndly arc Tor purposes ~ taxation. ale
though IN o. strict sense oniy evidences
NJ property The Constitution - 20
this proposition that iR the thorough
meas Of the taxation HyHtcm-was re-
Gently interpreted by the supreme court
~ the State ln a correiltlve proposition.
the opinion hoinr By Chief Justice lgne.
u related 10 the abatement or modlnca-
ton NJ taxes ln certain cases. which,
% was held. could not be done. because
I the Consultation c1mprohondod cpuli,
impartial and unexooptlonal taxation.
II ls thus shown that the law o. nor
only Fundamental. but has received a
final Interpretation hy the court of last
resort
Taking these thinrs into consldcra-
ton. arc not q e0od many " our cltl-
gems and Sonic fow NJ the uipcrs on the
wrong scent. aa ~ were. regarding the
local ans sti1e bonding syatcms7 IN,
obligations OF tho commonwealth have
been freely taken on even moro favor
able terms than were asked. because
they have been made exempt from state
taxation. the city bonds are the sub.
icct Of considerable anlmadvortlon. De-.
cause they are made subject To- state
hut not 20 city taxation. which glve-
the other bonds an advantage IN tnr
market. But u not the citizen. not
withdrawing the law In his favor In on-
case ana tho ordinance fiyoring
him In the other In an insecure posi-.
ton regarding immunity from public
assessment on the bonds of either
kind that he may hnld7 The LeFlsla-
ture has very much moro power IN tho
matter of legislation than any city
/ council has. any of the work ~ the
latter can be repealed or added 10 by the
former: ana Il the Legislature has no
constitutional authority to exempt
bonds from taSntion-a subject To- be-
discussed a little further OMIT follows
that the council not only has no such
authority but goes o. long way IN the
opposite direction from right when ID
assumes 30 10 act. 70 that, no matter
under what clrcumutancoa or 90 what
/ extent the citizen may be bondhoidor
OF either the state or the municlpallty.if
I'thc law ana The ordinance cxcmptlng
him frum taxation ON such holdings
shall be- found 10 be- Unconstitutional.
he will b. liable Tor AN taxes. prospec.
lively. presently ana rctruspoctivoiy.
that he would be- ana have been sub
jcct "a 10 no such onaclmgn,a had ever
existed.
Arileic XIII. section 2. ~ the cons,l-
tuition. under the heading " Revenue
and Taxation" provides that AN prop.
or,y in the state. not cxemp, uudor the
laws 81 the United States or tho Com
s'ituilon N Utah. shall be- taxed In pro-
portion % ~ value ~ nsccrialncd by
law. The word property" II defined ns
including moneys. credits. bonds
stocks, franchises and an matters cipa-
BILE NJ private ownership Property
owned by the State or by any mum.
clpallty or school district. not being
capable OF private ownership. are cx.
ompt liut bonds. though issued hy
either of those divisions NJ the clvli
government. are NOT the property OF
cithcr ua such. although designed 90
br'ng money into their respective treas
urirH. and they nrH NOT only capable
OF private ownership hui N no other.
They confer benefit upon the holder
% them, aH other property IL supposed
Co do. only that they are much more
beneficial than some of the other prop
critics that are taxed. Ia tina, thcy do
not shrink in value, and produce an un.
failing Increment An these considera-
lions. one would think. were sum
i o.. Ia lHIH lHaaa A.