OCR Text |
Show JUDGE VARIAXS OPINION. On another page of this paper will be found an ehau:ti e review of the proposed pro-posed amendment to the coniitution of ;the state of L'tah regarding the taxation taxa-tion of mines. This review is the work of Hon. C. S. Variun, one of the leading lead-ing members of the b?.r in the west and i . a member of the convention which drafted the organic law of the state at ; the time it was admitted into the union. Judge A'arian finds the amendment nt-! nt-! torly at variance with every recognized) (principle of right and practice, and he j ! quotes the constitution of t lie United ibtates and numerous decisions of the court of last resort to bear Out his as-' as-' sertions. Upon reading over these su-: su-: preme court opinions, we find that time and time again the leariied justices have 'declared that the Fourteenth amend-jment amend-jment to the federal constitution was r ' undoubtedly intended not only that there should be no arbitrary deprivation j of life or liberty, or arbitrary spoliation of property, but that equal protection 'and security should be given to all under un-der like circumstances in the engagement engage-ment of their personal and civil rights." These are the exact words of the court in the case of Barbier vs. Connolly. "This amendment," says Judge Ya-rian, Ya-rian, "violates all principles of representative repre-sentative and free government. It commits com-mits to a board, non-elective, but appointed ap-pointed Idv the governor, the power to tax the citizen upon a valuation arbitrarily arbi-trarily fixed by its members, thus ignoring ignor-ing a fundamental principle that the people are not to be taxed but by representatives repre-sentatives ehosen immediately by themselves. them-selves. And the tax is to be assessed at a value bRsed upon a multiple of the actual net proceeds, fixed by the board without notice or hearing. In these particulars it is id conflict with the Fourteenth amendment forbidding ' any state to deprive any person of property Without due process of law or to deny any person within its "jurisdiction the eqnal protection of the laws." This strikes at the very root of the controversy, contro-versy, and every fair-minded citizen must reach the conclusion that an attempt at-tempt is being made to perpetrate a great wrong upon the mine owners, and that, if the amendment carries, years of litigation will follow. Judge Va-rian Va-rian 's luminous exposition of tho issues should be carefully read and considered by the intelligent voters of the state. |