Bisbee daily review., 1902-02-27
CORPORATION
 AND TAXATION.

Under the above caption, after sev- eral weeks of of lsborious thought, and as the articles states, after numerous interviews with leading business men of this and other counties, the Nogales Oasis takes occasion to criticise Judge Davis on his decision in the tax case in this county, entitled Copper Queen vs Nj. D. Scribner, county treasurer ct al.
 The editor of the Oasis, in his com ments on the case, shows a wOeful lack of knowledge of the facts, the grounds for cause of action as contained in the plaintiffs complaint, and the conclu- sions of law and the findings of facts upon which Judge Davis based his decision.
 The editor of the Oasis intimates that Judge Davis lost the opportunity of his life time by not rendering his decision in accordance with popular lpproval-that kind of approval which is freely dispensed on the street corner and is given on all. occasions, by the chronic dry goods box whittier.
 If judges held their ear to the ground listening for popular approval, before they rendered their decisions, then our judiciary would be branded as weak lings and not entitled 10 the respect and honor due. the courts of this great commonwealth. One of the few ad- vantages of our territorial form of gov ernment is an appointed bench, who know no fear or favor, and are entirely removed from political influence in the trial of law suits. During the trial of this case the REVIEW expressed the opinion that the decision of Judge Davis would be based on the law and the evidence. Whatever the decision may have been, either adverse or fla vorable to the plaintiff, we would still hold to the same opinion. The appeal of the case to the supreme court was to be expected. This announcement was made by both sides before the conclusion of the trial. and the per fecting of the appeal in no wise places Judge Davis in bad light with think ing or sensible people. Judging from the manner in which the case was tried, ar d the length of time taken by the Judge, before decision was ren dered, it embodied the result of care full search and study.
 The Oasis attempts to criticise the decision of Judge Davis from lega standpoint and starts out by assuming certain questions to have been tht issues which in no manner entered into the case. In the first place the case 0 the Copper Queen Con. Min. Co. vs Nj. D. Scribner, county treasurer, was entered on the docket of Cochise county before the act of the last legis lature took effect, which required the payment of taxes assessed by the board of equalization before an appea could be taken, so the plaintiff wa. within the law on this point. Sec ondly, the question of unequal taxa tion, as compared with other mine: in the territory, did not enter into the case. The jurisdiction of the bos rt was not questioned, but the plaintiff confined their complaint principally t, the manner in which the assessment was raised charging that the board acted in an arbitrary and cspricious manner that their raises were unsupported b, competent testimony. This was tn, main issue in the trial and the abov, charges which were proven to tn, satisfaction of His Honor embraced tn, findings of the court. So much for tn trial of this particular case.
 The question of taxation of mine and mining property in Arizona ha become a vexatious one. Each suc ceeding legislature las wrestled wit the matter but to no purpose. Tn action of the beard of supervisors ( Cochise coun:y and the inaction ( other boards throughout the territor hae exposed the fallacy of the preser system. Until Arizona enacts res sonable bullion tax law we will nt have just assessment of the pro ducing mines of this territory.
 It is to be hoped that the next legi laturs will devote it's energy along tn