Page:Henry Osborn Taylor, A Treatise on the Law of Private Corporations (5th ed, 1905).djvu/520

 § 492^.] THE LAW OF PRIVATE CORPORATIONS. [CHAP. VIII. process of law, however obnoxious it may be to other objec- tions." ' § 492«. Giving the opinion of the court in Hagar v. Recla- mation District (after quoting approvingly from Davidson v. New Orleans), Justice Field said : " It is sufficient to observe here that by ' due process ' is meant one which, following the forms of law, is appropriate to the case, and just to the parties to be affected. It must be pursued in the ordinary mode prescribed by the law ; it must be adapted to the end to be attained ; and wherever it is necessary for the protection of the parties, it must give them an opportunity to be heard respecting the justice of the judgment sought. The clause in question means, therefore, there can be no proceeding against life, liberty, or property which may result in the deprivation of either, without the observance of those general rules established in our system of jurisprudence for the secu- rity of private rights.- Unless restrained by provisions of the Federal constitution, the power of the state, as to the mode, form, and extent of taxation, is unlimited, where the subjects to which it applies are within her jurisdiction." 3 " Of the different kinds of taxes which the state may impose, there is a vast number of which, from their nature, no notice can be given the taxpayer, nor would notice be of any possible advantage to him, such as poll taxes, license taxes (not depend- ent upon the extent of his business), and generally, specific taxes on things, or persons, or occupations. In such cases the legislature, in authorizing the tax, fixes its amount, and that is the end of the matter. If the tax be not paid, the property of the delinquent may be sold, and he be thus deprived of his property. Yet there can be no question that the proceeding is due process of law, as there is no inquiry into the weight of evidence, or other element of a judicial nature, and nothing could be changed by hearing the taxpayer. No right of his is, therefore, invaded. . . . " But where a tax is levied on property, not specifically, but according to its value, to be ascertained by assessors appointed 1 See, also, Kentucky R. R. Tax Cases, 115 U. S. 321. 2 Citing Hurtado v. California, 110 U. S. 516, 530. 500 3 Quoted from State Tax on For. eigu Held Bonds, 15 Wall. 300, 319.