Santa Fe new Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1898-1951, 1905-04-18
THE MARTIN
RELIEF LAW
An Attack Upon Its ConstItu,
tiona|ity Argued Before Judge
John R. McFie Today.
IMPORTANT POINTS
An Effort to Enjoin the Territorial Treas.
urer and Auditor From Carrying
Int Effect its Provisions. Will
Be Taken Under Amusement.

In the District Court of the Firs
Judicial District for the County O
Santa Fe, Judge John r. McFie il
chambers at the Capitol today heart
the case of Thomas B. Catron, plain
tiff, VS.. William G.. Sargent, as audi
tor of public accounts, and j. H
Vaughn as treasurer of the Territory
of New Mexico. The plaintiff seeks tt
make permanent the injunction re
Gently granted temporarily by Judge
McFie against the defendants, enjoin
ing them from carrying out the provi
sions of the so-called Martin Flood
Sufferers Relief Law and an amend
ment thereto passed by the Seth Leg
lslative Assembly, and with the provi
sions of which the readers of the New
Mexican are familiar. The case is
probably the most important that has
come before the court in many years
for it involves questions of much wild
er application than simply to the issue
at present before the court.
The plaintiff, as a taxpayer of New
Mexico, and representing himself, at.
tacks the constitutionality of the act,
averring that it is ultra wires, that is,
beyond the powers of the legislature
of the Territory; that it is in contra
vention of the Springer Act of Con-
gress, and part of the Organic Act
of the Territory, which defines the OBJ
jects for which Territory may incur
Indebtedness and limits the amount of
Indebtedness that may be incurred to
one per cent of the total taxable
property in the Territory as shown by
the last general assessment. The
plaintiff AYERS that the present indebt-
edness of the Territory is already two
per cent of the value of taxable prop
erty aud that therefore any. increase OF
that Indebtedness is void. The plain,
tiff also maintains that the Martin
Flood Sufferers Relief Law is special
and local legislation within the mean
ing of the clause of the Springer Act
prohibiting such legislation, because it
taxes all twenty-five of the counties
Of the Territory for the benefit of on.
ly thirteen counties and four designat.
ed communities and draws arbitrary
boundaries within which alone the
law Is to be applicable. These objec-
tions are also raised to the amend
ment to the Martin Flood Sufferers
Relief Law, which in addition, it is
maintained, confers upon territorial
officials discretionary and other pow.
ers which are properly only within the
province of the legislative body. The
plaintiff also AYERS that the enforce
ment of the act will lead to excessive
litigation on part of taxpayers resist
ing it's provisions. These are the main
points in the pleadings of the plaintiff,
which cover seventeen paragraphs.
The defendants, represented by
Judge A. J. Abbott and Assistant At
torney General E. G. Abbott, in their
rejoinder admit the allegations of
thirteen of the paragraphs,
but deny those of four
of the others, covering the main
questions of law that have been raised
besides having plaintiff admit that he
may be mistaken in his averment that
Territorial Treasurer J. H. Vaughn
had already signed the bonds author
lied to be issued under the act, an
averment which the plaintiff denies,
but which he waived, conf1ning
himself entirely to questions of
law and none of fact, therefore max
ing the taking of testimony unneces-
sary. The points denied by the de.
fense are that the legislation in ques.
tion is in contravention of the Spring.
er Act; they deny that 1t is local or
special; that 1t is ultra wires and that
1t will cause much litigation.
Judge A. J. Abbott opened the ar
gument, maintaining that the act falls
within the first exceptions of the
Springer Act, in that It meets casual
deficit caused by the legislature Great
ing Flood Sufferers Relief Fund
as 1t had the power to do and
appropriating $4,000 therefrom, and
that the one per cent limitation OF the
Springer Act does not apply to debts
incurred for the specific exceptions
mentioned in that act, that is, to meet
casual deficits in the revenues; to pay
the interest on the territorial debt and
to suppress insurrection or provide for
the public defense. The limitation, he
argued according to the plain intent
of the Springer Act, applied only TO-
Indebtedness incurred for public and
permanent improvements. He also
sought to show that legislation to re.
lieve suffering caused by unforeseen
calamity is within the province Of the
legislature. Incidentally, he argued
that the assessment Of the Territory
represents only from thirty-three to
nifty per cent Of It's taxable wealth.
fl43 Il