The Winslow mail., 1923-06-22

1nines for the same year. Yet they
i actu lIy paid in taxes approximately
three times the total amount paid by
j the Arizona mines.
| While this Commission is not pre-
pared to endorse the Minnesota sys-
/ TEN in its entirety, it does favor
that portion of the system known as
the Occupation Tax. This law was
passed some three years ago and i'm
| poses a six per cent tax ON the out
put after certain deductions in con-
nection with the mining operations.
| This tax is In addition to the regular
state and county taxes as found on
the valuation of the property. It
has very recently been passed upon
and held valid by the Supreme Court
| of the United States.
If the present intolerable situation
should continue to exist after the
tax levy has been made for the pres
| ent year, then this Commission would
recommend that Special Session OF
the Legislature be called for the
primary purpose Of revision of the
tax laws of the State Of Arizona,
particularly with reference to mine
| taxation. and that law similar to
the Minnesota Occupation Tax" law
be written into the Arizona Statutes.
Some special legislation Of this
character, that has been passed upon
by the Supreme Court Of the United
States and is not subject to legal
bubble, will be absolutely necessary
if governmental functions, such as
the maintenance of schools, roads
and other proper county and state
activities, do not cease to exist, pen
of hxy Fn60PQl
Courts, without the litigents being
compelled to pay comply with our
state laws requiring payment Of tax
es in full before litigation is COM
menced
To which the Governor replies, as
follows
Gentlemen:
The matter outlined in your letter
of June 7th Is of such vital import
ance and raises so many questions
Of such far-reaching import, that /
have taken several days to study it.
| am impressed with the seriousness
Of the condition which confronts the
financing of our State and County
governments.
The more l study the situation, the
more / am convinced that the FEEDER
al Court in assuming jurisdiction in
these tax cases is adopting policy
wholly unwarranted and without
authority, especially so by fiagrantly
ignoring paragraph 1899 Of the Civil
Code of Arizona and the decision of
the Supreme Court of the State up
holding it, which provides that mo
person, company, firm, partnership,
association, corporation, bank, or
public utility, upon which assess
ment shall have been imposed UN-
DER ANY PROVISION of law relat-
ing to the taxation of real or person
al property shall be permitted FOR
ANY REASON to contest the validity
thereof either as plaintiff or defend
ant, unless the amount of such tax
shall first have been paid to the
County Treasurer"
| am also impressed with the fact
that the Federal Court does not have
any constitutional authority granted
to it. It's sole power is derived from
a legislative act of Congress. The
corporations who have started this
! litigation are basing their claim to
have their assessment reviewed by
the Federal Court under that portion
of the Fourteenth Amendment to the
Constitution of the United States
which reads mo State shall make or
enforce any law which shall*
deprive any person Of life, liberty or
property without due process of law
nor deny to any person within its
jurisdiction the equal protection of
the laws"
I believe these tax cases are based
upon the flimsiest kind of a pretext
and I can find no language strong
enough to characterize the action of
the Court in assuming jurisdiction
and at the same time ignoring the
law of the State of Arizona and the
decisions of our State Supreme Court
aid permitting the litigants involv-
! eG to first pay what taxes the cor
porations think are equitable, instead
i of taxes fixed by law.
The power to tax is power vest
ed in the Legislature. The assess
ment of taxes is not a judicial act
and partikes of no element of judi
cial character. It is legislative
act and requires the exercise Of le-
gislative power whether the Legisla-
ture assesses direct or appoints an
agent, as it does in Arizona-the
Arizona State Tax COMMISSIONS
act for it, It's functions are legisfa-
| tive and in no manner partake of
| judicial character.
| If these cases are maintained it
will mean a long period Of litigation.
1t will mean that our fiscal system
will be upset and our schools, roads
and public institutions crippled. If
these cases are continued in the
courts it is impossible to say how
many pears it will take before the
! litigation is settled. In the mean
time 1 presume that the court will
permit these corporations to con-
tinue to pay what they deem to be
reasonable taxes" and it will be an
! inducement for other corporations
and large taxpayers to adopt the
same course.
| This cannot be tolerated. The SOW
| ereign State of Arizona cannot sur
render the power to regulate taxa
| ton to any institution or court that