GAERETT V. OITY OF MEMPHIS. 879 �reference to the aforesaid third section oï the act of 1877, the act on which complainants rested their case, as briginally instituted) are constitutionally valid were passed, this court had, in virtue ôf this suit, jnrisdietion' of the cause, and therefore custody of the fund in litigation.' Its jurisdiction having once attached, it could not be ousted thereof by leg- islative enactment. To thus interfere, says Cbancellor Beese, in the case of Fisher'a Slaves v. Dobba, 6 Yerger, and take away the remedy, is to destroy the right, — a resuit -which, in the judgment of the supreme court ôf Tennessee, could not be accomplished in thiat way. �There is still another reason why the le^slature did not bave the authority to "alter, postpone, or release" these unpaid taxes. The constitution ôf Tennessee requires that taxes sball be uniform. Now, if, in the first instance, the legislature had itself levied or authorized the city of Memphis to levy and collect taxes from that portion of its citizens who paid the levies made, and had exempted the delinquents, or if the legislature had required the former to pay in' inoney promptly as the levies were made, aûd authorized the delih- quents to pay from 10 tô 15 per cent, of the assessmerit • in depreciated debts, etc., as it has assumed to do by theisë re- pealing and subsequent acts, the legislation would bave been admittedly in contravention of the constitution, and void; and the prompt tax payers could have protected themselves against such inequality and injustice by enjoining the coUeo-, tion of the taxes assessed against them. .i.Now, can this same resuit be accomplished by indirection ? Under the con- stitution of Tennessee the legislature cannot, without a gross violation of that instrument, assess a uniform tax, collect fr^mi three-fifths of those assessed, and then release the residue. If it can, the injustice' and inequality Whîôh the. constitution sought to prevent would resuit. Sô the'- legislation -^hich is used to defeat complainants enôroaehes ùpon the vôsled rights of the othef tax payers as well as upônthe rights of creditors. If the delinquent tfiîes hàd been collected in due course of law, therë wôiild' bave beeïi no apparent iiecessity for the efforts that have been and are lïo-w^ being made ,to ����
