Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1899-04-29
TAXING POWER
OF THE STATE.
Important Opinion Handed Down in
a EVANSVILLE Case.
OyERRuLE PRIOR DECISIONS
IuoIds that cities Can Tss Al Lands
In Their Limits uersrdi.ss Of
Distance out

The Supreme Court handed down n
most important opinion today in the
three cases Of II. Farley Kimbali. SAM
uei W. wooiley and Hiram y. Booth Va
Graniayilie city. appellant reversing
Judge cherry and ordering - decrce en-
tered In favor Of appellant. The decia-
lon IN brief holds that cities can tax
all lands In their limits. regardless OF
the dlstarcc out. though used exclusive
~ for agricultural purposes, no mater
whether the lands receive any munlcl-
nal benefits OF not. 10 also oycrruica
the decision rendered by chief Justice
Pane last september. and concurrcd In
ty Jukticcf nhftch and Miner. in tie
case OF kaysvllc city w Ellison. ~
well aa the following Territorial cnacsi
People W Daniels. Ellison W fslnford.
Cook " crandall and sait Lake city
W Wagner.
n shorid b. stated that Judsc ch''ry
In rendering aecrcca In the thru, .asrs
followed snc limo of decisions laid down
by Judg. Zane and allowed Grants.
vile Guy ,asra on all the lands that
were In reach Of municipal bcneh'r.
The lands lying FAR out and used st-
eiusiyeiy foi agriculture and graxinr.
hs homer onjoincd the collection Of the
Action IN these cases were bouEh. to
-rrtrrin the collection OF n city tax
levied upon the properties of respond.
snts In 1897. The respondents insiAted
that their lands were used excluslfely
for ng, cultural and grazing purposes
and received no benefits from the uty
ard therefore was not liable for ora !.
nary city taxes. Judge Cherry found
that a tur.ion Of Kimhail and Booths
lands we're IN reach 81 some benefits
and NJ 10 those lands, held In favor Of
the city. A PORTION 81 their lands. how.
ever. he held were 20 far out - 20 b"
beyond The rrnsc of municipal benefits,
and ~ 20 these properties he cnjolned
the collection Of che tax.
In the case Of wooilcy. his ranch was
situated n distance 81 about three miles
beyond the city. as Indicated by houses.
lots. blocks and streets. and Judge
Cherry held that Woollcy received no
dement's from CrantHviile and therefore
enjolned the collection Of tho tax on the
whole 81 the woolley ranch.
The rane was appealed 10 the Ru-
preme court and the broad stand taken
that n made no difference where land
was situated n on the city limits n II
liable for city taxes. and that In what
the Supreme court now holds.
LAW MAKING POWER.
In discussing tho question Of law
making power, WHERE vested, etc. thu
syllabus In the cnse reads nH follows.
THE whole law making power ~ a
State. except such M N reserved by thu
State or Federal Constitution. having
been committed 10 the Legislature. IN
the absence Of any constitutional ~.
aff.lnf .mur.saad a. i,,noitaJ a.. 4 ..sfa
iatufc may act upon any subject within
the sphere % the government; and n
IN the absence Of any constitutional ~.
rfriction. II nAkeA a law. there N No
authority In the government which car
declare II void nnd no court has power
to arrest itn execution"
In discussing section 20. hrt. I. ~ the
State conntitution-that private prop
crty shall not be taken or damaged fol
public use without Just compensation.
the court says
I'VE are therefore Of the opinion thai
the constitutional provision prohibiting
the damaging or taking Of private prop
crty for public use without Just com,
pennhtion.ia not a limitation on the tax,
ing power Of the state. but II iimitn,
tion on the exercise ~ the power ol
eminent domain. and this We conceive
70 Be In accord with tho weight VI au
thority."
Judge Pane, In discussing this sam,
constitutional provision In the Daniel
case. said, In brief. tina, there was n,
difference In principle whether mani
property was taken or Injured for pub
lie use or his money taken from hin
by tax.
The findings Of Judge Cherry, whlol
were not attacked. show that Grants
VILE city covers twenty and ono.four,i
square miles. while the city propc
covers about one square mile-that In
city Included all the ranches and farm
IN that portion OF Tooeie Valley an,
thousands Of acres az vacant aud un
cultivated lands belonging 90 the Unit
ed States and others.
The eject OF this decision II that al
the cities and towns In Utah may la
all the lands within their limits, with
out fear 81 Injunction.
The law frm of ilhwiins. Thurman
iiufd and WodFewood represented ap
pellant, and James 4. Williams III
respondents. Earh side filod two brief
IN tho cases. Tho actions we're stub
bornly contested.
The opinion ~ by Chiof Juntle
liartch. Justices Miner and naakln con
cur because Of tho provisions IN IN
ktAtH IanUfINnglAn