The Carson daily appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1865-1870, 1870-01-25
TIE RAILROAD ASSESSMENT CASE
THE DECISION By TIE SUPREME
COURT.

recens proceed nes in and on, of Court
involving the assessment of the properly
10 this County, of The v. j. T. R. r.,
and much misrepresentation of facts
having arisen ther-from, We have been
ct some pains to acquaint ourself with
the facts of the matter. For some day
past we have heard many bitter com
plants against the Supreme Court /; it
having been averred, with an apparent
show Of truth, that that tribunal con
stru-d III, Law one way, in the case of
Washoe County rs the Central Pacific
Raiiroad Co and that they reversed
shat very recent decision at the dicta-
iion If, or out Of bias for, the Virginia
and Truckee Railroad Company. These
slsuderous misrepresentation are in
keeping with the usual tactics of the
Copperheads; but they are un~ortby to
be repea'ed by any Republicau-and We
are sorry TO say that we have heard
them repeated, or insinuated, by men of
our party who ought TO know better
then TO believe, much less to utter,
such charges against the Supreme
Court. Let US look at the facts.
The Washoe case, which came before
the Supreme Court upon a writ of eertio
rori, involved this question: "Have the
Board Of Equalization the power TO re.
cUce an assessment, made by the
County Assessor, under the Revenue
Laws, II the party assessed has refused
or neglected to make a statement re.
gardlng his property The Court de-
cided rhatthe Board Of Equalization has
40 such power aud further decided
that the valuation of The Central Pacific
Railroads property in Wasboe County
as assessed By the Couuty Assessor was
unalterabie, by the Board, under the
existing circums.anees-tbe Railroad
Company having refused TO make a
statement The very evident reasons
FOR this decision are coniained in the
foIlowing, " hich is an extract from Sec
sion Eff cen of IAN Act to Provide
Reseaue for the support of the Govern.
ment of the State of Nevada" ap.
proved March 8, 1865. Defining the
Powers of The Board of Equaii-af6on, the
Act says:
The Board of Equalization shall have power
20 determine all complaints made In regard /
20 the assessed value of any property, and |
may change and correct any valuation. either |
5y adding thereto deducting therefrom, if |
they deem the sum fixed in the assessment |
rcli either above or below its true value |
~hether said sum was fixed BY the owner OF |
the assessor. Except at an case aohere the |
person complaining Of the assessment hes re- |
fused to ire the assessor his 6st under oath. |
Is required By this ict. no reduction skaIbe |
made by the Board Of Equalization an the as
easement made b.. the assessor-@
1t Is PLAN enough that the Cour,
merely followed the statute 10 this ease
the Board of Equalization having
reduced the assessment OF the assessor,
snd the Railway Company having los
their tight 10 have such reduction mad
1y reason Of their refusal to make the
as required by statute, nader
path.
Now let US examine the case OF the
Y. l. T. r. 4. Co. rs. the Counry Com
niss.Oners of Ormsby County. The
history, in brief, of this case, IL as fDl
ows: Tie C0uaty Treasurer acting
.nder the so-calied Supplementary Tax
Jaw of 1861, assessed tue Y. * I. Il
T. Co 3 Road properly ut $50, 600 per
nile. The Company demurred to thi-
assessment aud applied to the BoaEd
II Commissioners to hear testimony
lpon the matter, which application
,eing refused, they sued out writ of
'sqadanys TO compel the Board Of Comfy
TO take action with re
pect TO such application. Ii will be
observed that we have ilalieised Board
# Equalization" and BOARD of County
smnissioners We have done this
or the parpose of ealling attention TO
he wide distinction between the two
'oards.) The SapFe@e Ceur; decided
Ia, tie ss4adsmzs should issue; and 10