Show EXCESS SS INVALID the issuing of warrants in excess ot of legal indebtedness I 1 has baa been a theme of much dis discussion cussi on and worry in salt lake city and coduti and to fo far faras as concerns county warrants of that character prior to the inauguration of tie state government the he legislature alter considerable ff ling firling was induced to validate them this legislative action however din dia not nol authorize cities or counties to 10 go on iu incurring indebtedness in excess of the legal limit hence spy any puca jab a now or her contracted are void tue state constitution provides provide that thai no county or thereof or city village or of school district shall creati crealo in any use year a debt in excels of the be taxes for that your year except by consent of the taxpaying aud aua wha th this consent is at an election hold held for the purpose ae the county cannot incur including that already existing exceeding two per cent of the aspersed asp eased valuation of property properly nor can a city or town exceed four per cent oi 01 nab valuation this restriction did vot cot apply in cases where bonds etc ate had been arranged for prior to admi admission eslon to the union but became operative on all business done after statehood was assumed asi umed it IB ia no secret that in salt lake city and county there are some come who urge that an excess of the debt limi twill le a necessity nece wity before the eod end of the pros pre who confidently assert that that uch excess will be met and paid rather than ban that any repudiation ly shall take place to such we suggest that there are other othere and a very large number too who teel feel that the repudiation dia tion tionA cry ba a gone far enough in the way ot of justifying the payment of 01 illegally Ide Rally incurred debts no matter for what purpose the discussion and events eventa of a few month during the legislative session semion and the be provisions of law on the subject which have been referred to so much that they ought to be commonly understood are regarded as a notice to all comers comer that if they bey allow themselves theona elvee to become creditors to diihr oily city ur or county of too cne legal limit they will bis ba barred irom from making auy collection there Is so no repudiation in this business bual bu aeu it la Is merely a blunt refusal to have the constitution and law jaw trifled with as aa the latter has baa been la in the past by car i talo tain officials 1 1 I 1 he decision cf the supreme court of california in what la Is known as aa all the bradford case handed down last iam tuesday should be a suggestion tp prospective creditors of elty city and county abat their bills should be within the legal leal debt limit it if they want them paid in the state referred to the be repudiation 1 1 argument was worked in justification of exceeding the debt liability until a suit quit was entered to stop it wallace bradford bean be an suit in 1896 1895 to have the authorities of the city and county of san francisca enjoined from further increasing tile the val oal deficit as represented by the excess at that time the debt limit bad been cassed assed by with a prospect tb abat at by the close of the 1 floes fiscal year it would reach it was his theory that such bills could not be paid because of 0 the Cona titu dional provi provision elon bidding the making of the obligation in 10 the lower courts be lost his bis case but the supreme court decision la Is in ble bis lavor favor on every point the court holds hold that an equity court cours would rest real rain the levy and collect collection ioli f a tax intended to meet the illegal debt the court pays of the constitutional rule that it places a limits limit a check upon cupoo thra the power of municipal officers to expend expand money beyond the resources provided for the current year A barrier agair ket indebtedness eune by municipal officers and local bodies has lueen been created by the constitution upon tle tie altie court holds that the creditors for the mount amount or ol the excess of indebtedness cannot be paid ind and with respect to the injunction asked for fo addi we cun conclude clude then that in a proper case municipal officers at the Inath instance uce of a taxpayer will be constrained from contracting tr illegal debts and from levying and collecting taxes for the payment thereof and from enforcing the payment ot of such taxes perhaps in salt lake city and county there will be no creditors out side of the amount of lim limitation fixed by the state constitution and per baas there may be judging by the trend tread of af istre and if there are any they need not be surprised at some taxpayer proceeding so as in the california case creditors creditor who sometimes take chances hereabouts on illegally in curbed debts might not got find it unprofitable to keep their weather eye open |