680 



PENNSYLVANIA. 



Supreme Court of the State in January, 1878.^ It 

 related to the assessment of taxes on farming 

 lands included in extended city limits, and is 

 known as Kelly vs. City of Pittsburg. As long 

 ago as 1807 the limits of the city of Pittsburg 

 were so extended as to embrace a large tract of 

 country composed chiefly of farm lands and in- 

 cluding several entire townships. The plaintiff 

 in the suit owned a farm of eighty acres, bound- 

 ed by farms, except an adjacent parcel of about 

 twenty acres, laid off into lots. On one side of his 

 tract was about one thousand acres in farms, 

 and surrounding and between it and the city 

 were other farms. His land was used for farm- 

 ing and dairy purposes only. It was not brought 

 into the city with his consent, nor was it sur- 

 veyed into lots. It was distant from gas-pipes 

 and lamps, water-pipes, sewers, police-beats, 

 and fire-apparatus. It had no streets or lanes 

 maintained for city uses, except those prior 

 existing roads which were and continued to be 

 sufficient for the use of his farm. In conse- 

 quence of being brought within the city limits 

 it was taxed a sum of $2,117 on a valuation of 

 $244,000 for city purposes alone, exclusive of 

 county, poor, and school taxes, while the pro- 

 ductive yearly value of the land as a farm was 

 a total of $800. Upon the constitutional rights 

 involved in this state of facts, the Judges of the 

 Supreme Court of Pennsylvania became en- 

 gaged in a grave and dignified but serious judi- 

 cial quarrel. The majority of the Judges car- 

 ried a decision in favor of the municipal tax. 

 Two of the Judges, however, filed dissenting 

 opinions. One says : 



The true question is the authority of the city to 

 burden such property in its existing condition with 

 taxes for merely city purposes. The power to ex- 

 tend the limits is conceded. It is often necessary as 

 a wise preparation to bring such lands into a state 

 that may adapt them to future progress. But this 

 concession to the power of extension and general 

 municipal jurisdiction gives no power to tax farms 

 having no need "of city improvements for exclusively 

 city purposes. Taxes levied on mere farm lands to 

 pay city levies, appreciable only to the built-up or 

 true city, is nothing more than an order to farmers 

 to pay for the benefit of the city residents. The 

 taxing power may be exercised to the full extent of 

 the public exigency, but it is bounded in its exercise 

 by its own nature, essential characteristics and pur- 

 pose. It must therefore visit all alike, in a reason- 

 able, practicable way, within the just limits of what 

 is taxation. Like the rain, it may fall upon the peo- 

 ple in districts and by turns, but still it mustbepub- 



j in its purpose and reasonably just and equal in its 



distribution. All men participate more or less in the 



general advantage of government, but there can be 



no such postulate for the imposition of local burdens 



for specific benefits. A court must regard a substan- 



return and not a merely speculative or shadowy 



ttt which amounts to no more than a pretext. 



Some rural properties may be subject to municipal 

 taxation, for they may have the benefit of gas, water, 

 police, and other city advantages. But when the 

 property is, as here, a farm, not subject to the tax for 

 se city purposes, it is manifest'that classification 

 has nothing to do with the case. This farm is not 

 taxable at all for these purely city purposes. 



We have arrived just at that point in the history of 

 _ocal taxation .where, m my judgment, this Court 

 should stand firmly as the bulwark of human rights 



PERU. 



to prevent their sacrifice in detail, and by gradual 

 encroachment. If the rights of property can be taken 

 or taxed away, without a justifiable cause to bring 

 the legislative act within the just powers of gov- 

 ernment, it is confiscation, not legal contribution. 

 Planted on the broad foundations of the rights of 

 men, I shall stand alone, if no one go with me, in the 

 defense of constitutional liberty, opposed to every 

 scheme of plunder^ however gilded or bright, which 

 the tenants of municipal places may devise. 



PERU (REPUBLIC A DEL PEE!:), an indepen- 

 dent state of South America. 



The census of 1876 sets down the population 

 of Peru at 2,699,945. The President is Gen- 

 eral Mariano Ignacio Prado, installed in office 

 on August 2, 1876. The President organized 

 a new Cabinet December 17, 1878, as follows: 

 Interior, Sr. Don Juan Corrales Melgar ; Jus- 

 tice and Public Worship, Dr. Don Mariano 

 Felipe Paz-Soldan ; Foreign Affairs and Presi- 

 dent of the Council, Sr. Don M. Irigoyen ; War 

 and Marine, General Domingo del Solar; Fi- 

 nance, Sr. Izcue. The President of the Supreme 

 Court is Sr. Don T. A. Ribeyro ; Postmaster- 

 General, Sr. Don F. de P. Mufioz; Inspector- 

 General of the Army, General M. Rivarola ; 

 Commandant- General of the Navy, Rear- Ad- 

 miral A. de la Haza. 



The Peruvian Consul-General in JSTew York 

 is Mr. J. C. Tracy. 



The Archbishop of Lima is P. Orueta y Cas- 

 trillon. 



The navy of Peru is composed of 18 vessels, 

 of 3,396 horse-power and 66 guns. The army 

 has been reduced to 3,000 men, forming 8 bat- 

 talions of infantry, 3 regiments of cavalry, and 

 2 brigades of artillery. There are besides 1,000 

 gendarmes and 1,200 policemen (vigilantes}. 



A preliminary session of Congress was opened 

 on the 12th of July, and the Civil party, kt op- 

 position to the Government, secured an over- 

 whelming majority, and on July 26th elected 

 Sr. Don Manuel Pardo, formerly President of 

 the Republic, as President of the Senate, and 

 Captain Camilio Carillo, the distinguished sci- 

 entist, Speaker of the Lower House. On the 

 anniversary of Peruvian independence, July 

 28th, President Prado opened Congress in per- 

 son, and in his message reviewed at some length 

 the condition of the country, which he thought 

 more favorable than when he assumed the reins 

 of Government, the most important financial 

 questions having been arranged. Jealous of 

 the national honor, the Government was doing 

 all that was possible to reestablish the credit 

 of the republic, and would not rest until that 

 end was attained. The seizure of the Huascai 

 by an English ship of war was alluded to in 

 these terms: "If an unexpected incident was 

 at one time sufficiently serious to endanger our 

 friendly relations with Great Britain, that dan- 

 ger is removed by the conciliatory manner in 

 which our reclamation was answered. But this 

 answer, although amicable, is not altogether 

 satisfactory, since it is based on a denial of our 

 right. The Government has repeated its de- 

 mand for redress, and expects that it will be 



