The Morning Tulsa daily world. [volume] (Tulsa, Okla.) 1919-1927, 1922-09-04
srNrr sOviWIGNrY CiiUNHJNG.


Tho iet raj injunction against the state tnHing
authorities Issued "a, tho request Of the Frisco
and Rock Island railways, 10 the latest assault
upon the remnants OF state sovereignty The
march Of a federal overordship continues IN
cheolsd, while tho pride Of state jurisdictions
is bowed stlli lower.
IT, under the constitution Of tho United states
n sovereign state has not jurisdiction over its
tax mattcrs concerning what subject, plenso'
has it such authority we have seen i's police
powers gradually taken away from it through
one pretcxt or another. hut always we have bson
reminded tht In The matter of lsvylug and col
iectlnR taxee for .its internal needs the state
stood supreme
Concerning tho merit or the Frlsco-Rock Is
land contention. that lts property has been m
Justly valued FOR taxation purpoaea. we are not
familiar. Nor la that the issue In this discus
sion n theso roads felt themselves aggrie 'ed
they had their clear road 10 constitutional
remedy through the state courts II has only
beon matter Of fow months since the federal
court from which omanatcd this Injunction
against the equalization board. refused 10 take
Jurisdiction Of the case brought against the cor
poratlon commission by the oklahoma Natural
Gas company, because that concern had not ok
haustcd It's legal rights In the state courts. vet
here the court takes Jurisdiction OF similar
case before the plaintiffs mad exercised any OF
their rights In the state courts.
The point Is made that because the two roads
in question we're In the hands Of receivers sp-
pointed by tho federal courts they were unier
the iuriwctlon OF tho federal court and that
therefore their action In appealing to the fed
eral court is proper.
Such theory Will not bear exhaustive oNrm-
nation. Surely It ls not contended that tho duty
or these properties TO the state in respect 20
taxes has been modified by the federal receiver
ship? Nor can It he urged that the roads are
relieved Of their duty In such respect by such
receivership. Either the state has right TO fix
the value and levy the assessment against such
property or it has not. II Il has such right, then
the rlsht inuros regardless Of tho ownership
or tho custodanship Of the property And he
owners or custodans OF such property, seeking
relief from tho enforcement OF state laws alpng
such lines are hoth legally and logically com
PEELED to exhaust their rights in the state juds-
dicuon before seeking federal tribunal and
thrn only IA case they ARG prepared to plead that
entirely too flexible constitutional propost on.
conrscation OF property without due sanction
OF law.
We think Governor Robertson's objection 70
the action Of the sedorol tribunal is well taFen
and ably stated The roads, II they felt thom-
selves unjustly treated, had their relief they
should have paid their taxes under protest, os
private citizens are compelled to do, then sought
their relief through formal application to he
proper state tribunal
It is difficult to understand Just what ,b-
iectye these roads have IA sight II they hope
70 nave federal judge issue a decision either
relieving them from their state taxes or modify
ing the charges made aeainst them by the state
authorities they are seeking a decision that
oven ton years ago would have been considered
utterly impossible
This latest assault upon the rights OF a s1v.
oro,gu state which we're never before in dispute
will bear the closest watching. vital principle
Is involved,