The weekly true Democrat. (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1905-1912, 1906-09-14

authority Of the courts, dissOlving itS
writs, and sell the land? Who would be
insane enough to purchase?
The land outside Of the FIRST drain
age district" is not yet liable for drain
age taxes; but who knows that the
board will not (perhaps next week, or
next month"; Greats another drainage
district and proceed, as it has already
done, TO levy drainage taxes with the
proceeds Of which to drain the Ever
glades') upon lands which lie scores or
hundreds Of miles distant from the
Everglades, and upon lands which can
not by any possibility be benefited by
such drainage, or any drainage, and
upon lands, like cypress timber, the
value of which would be irreparably
injured, IL not utterly destroyed, by
drainage?
"a. II the railroads should ultimately
get the lands, the State would still be
the gamer, because, after drainage, the
lands will represent many million dol
lars in taxable property and the. State
VIII ISCGlNG bhACS bilNiIy "hS'~eS
now il receives nothing,
If the courts decree that the lands
belong TO the railroads, and command
the Board TO make deeds accordingly,
will not the lands be at once placed
upon the tax books and State and coun-
ty taxes assessed against them, payable
by the railroads? And is not the Board
! (by refusing to make deeds, as COM
manded to do by the Legislature), and
by conteSting the rights Of the railroads
in the courts) itself primarily response
bic for the fact that 1.-THE State re-
ceives nothing" and has long been pre-
vented from receiving anything in the
shape of taxes, from these lands? The
alleged increase in value on account Of
drainage is a proposition 80 remotely
problematical as to scarcely merit seri-
Gus consideration, particularly in view
of the fact, substantiated by abundant
testimony already taken in the drainage
injunction suits, that much of the land
proposed to be drained would be perma-
nently injured, instead of benefited, by
drainage, and in some instances it's
value absolutely destroyed, as in the
case of cypress lands.
"5. The railroads will not get the
lands, because, II everything else fails,
the State can still prove, by the COnsti-
tuition, that the various Legislatures
have given away more lands than the
Constitution permits them to grant
that said grants are unconstitutional
and that all of the remaining lands for
which deeds have not been made belong
to the school fund and cannot be decided
to a railroad company or any one else
except on payment of an agreed price. "
This appeal by Governor Broward to
the well-known devotion of the people
to the cause of popular education is a
last, final, desperate effort to rescue
the drainage scheme from its impend-
ing fate. Is it possible that, with the
devoted services of many highly paid IL
not distinguished legal advisers at its
command, the Board has omitted or
neglected to present to the courts, in
the several suits now pending, so vital
and important a constitutional question
as the one here stated II the State
"can still prove" that the land grants
are void, why has it not been done here
tofore7 And why-with such counsel
to advise it as Raney, the learned jurist,
Cooper, the distinguished lawyer, La
mar, the veteran public servant, Whit
field, the peoples choice for Supreme
Court Justice, not to mention a long
list Of able men preceding them-why
has this crucial constitutional point
never before been raised, to squelch
the greed of the railroad companies and
conclusively dispose, in the twinkling of
an eye, as 1t were, Of this whole vexed
and vexatious question? Was it because
those great men were so poorly paid
for their services that this great fact
remained 70 be first discovered by a
more expensive adviser?
In order to fully understand the inn
port of this great discovery, and what
it's connection may be with the school
fund. we must refer to Governor Brow
ards letter itself. He quotes from the
Constitution to the effect that one item
of resource belonging to the State