Case ID: cal_19/html/0293-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Baldwin, J. delivered the opinion of the Court", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA v. WELLS, FARGO & CO.
    Under the seventy-fourth and seventy-fifth sections of the Revenue Act of 1861, (Stat. 442, 443) Wells, Fargo & Co., as common carriers of gold dust, are compelled to pay the license tax fixed by those sections on each of their branch establishments in the different counties of the State, as well as upon the principal house in San Francisco.
    Appeal from the Sixth District.
    The substantial nature of the branch offices of defendants in the various counties of the State is so well known that no statement of facts, further than appears in the opinion of the Court, is necessary. The particular point upon which Wells, Fargo & Co. relied as exempting them from taking out a license for each branch office is, that their express business is an entirety and indivisible ; that its profits and losses can only be computed upon all its transactions throughout the entire State taken together; that it is impossible to compute the amount of business done by any one of the branch offices; that the express business is all from San Francisco to the interior and back, with the exception of a little way business, which amounts to almost nothing as compared with the through business ; and that the sole object of these branch offices in the country is to carry on the main business between San Francisco and the interior country; that all the accounts of defendants are kept in San Francisco, each branch office accounting directly to the office there ; that therefore to tax each branch office, would practically amount to taxing the same business several times.
    It was shown that defendants paid a license tax, as common carriers of gold dust, in San Francisco, and that in estimating the amount of business for the purpose of the license, the agent estimated the entire express business of the State.
    The case was tried on complaint,' answer, replication and two depositions of agents of defendants, in substance as above. Judgment for plaintiffs. Defendants appeal.
    
      H. P. Hepburn and Thomas Sunderland, for Appellants.
    
      
      C. Cole, District Attorney, for Respondents.
   Baldwin, J. delivered the opinion of the Court

Field, C. J. concurring.

Suit brought to compel defendants to pay a license as common carriers of gold dust on their branch establishments situated in Sacramento county. The suit is brought on sections seventy-four and seventy-five of the Revenue Act of 1861. (Stat. 442, 443.)

The counsel have strongly illustrated the hardship and injustice of compelling the defendants to pay the license tax on every establishment connected with their business in the various counties of the State, and the practical inconvenience and annoyance to which the requirement gives rise. . But on examining the act in question, the legality of the requirement is as clear as its asserted injustice; and it is not within our province to relieve the defendants from the harsh operation of the law, but only to determine its meaning. Upon proper representation to the legislative department, it cannot be doubted that relief would be granted, if the plausible statement of the counsel be justified by the facts. It is certain we have no power to remedy the grievance complained of.

Judgment affirmed.