, 1873-11-09

IA-AlAIlON.
still Another Protest AgnfMst tho
Enunat2,.tioats ~ OF tho slnte Hoard
--Tho Pacific Tuoto1 Company APP
plies for nn 1nJalnetion--fnOW Hts
Asscssment xVns Dlpproporttonntcly
1kniacd--The Onso Tnkcta Under Ad-
visements
Another case Involving tho legality OF tho aote
Of tho State Board OF Equalization was COM
neucod Saturday afternoon, in tho Circuit
Court. by tho Pacific Hotel Company Of Chicago.
ngalnst Joaoph Pollah.
The Company, 1t Is alleged in the bill, wns
organized under q special chaEter in 1869. the
capital boing A1od ut $5Oo,o0o, with liberty to
increase 1t to 91,0oD,000, whloh was
done. Stock to tho amount Of $700,000
WAS subscribed for and takon, aud monty
paid for. Wilson X. Nixon, Cornelius r. Fiold,
and Honry II. Smith, for the Company, aftor-
wnrds loasod from tho Northwestern University
the lot on which tho hotol is situated and tho
hotel erected thereon. At tho timo Of tho fire
tho building waH nearly completed, and all tho
Btook paid up was expended In erecting 1t. Tho
building was destroyed by fro, tho walls only ro-
maining. With about 100000 unpaid on stock
and the proceeds Of the insurance, tho hotel
was rebuilt, aided by a mortgage Of their iu-
terest.
Prior to 1873 the AHseasor Of South Chicago
assosged tho valuo Of tho building ut 9l44,00o,
bnt tho County Board, in their equalization,
lowered tho assessment et2, 800, making tho ap-
praised valuo s13l, ,04o. Tho State Board, how
over, raised 1t 107 por cont. tho Hame
as the rato in tho Republic Lilo 1nsur-
valuation "a S14o, ,212.so, aud making tho
total valuation SAIL 252.so which is tn oxeega Of
Doard has also ordered that $3.50, 900 be further
addod ~ tho value Of tho capital stock, Ions tho
value OF it's tangible property. This makes tue
whole valuation S82l, 80.
Complainant claims that tho assessment for
| taxation 30 made Is void,
| First, because it subjects complainant to tho
payment Of taxos greatly in aiBproportion to
tho valuo Of ita property, In violation Of Soc.
of Art. TX. OF tho Constitution, making, 1t
pay taxes on its capital stock and bonded In
debtodness neither Of which classes Of property
| aro owned by complainant. Second, 1t makaa
complainant pay taxes which should be assessed
| against tic shareholders and creditors. Again,
It subjects complainant to tho payment OF tazes
property Of tho eamo class. Fourth, tho at
tempt to give SUCH powor Of oqua!lza-
ton to The State poara was uneonatti- o1!slta
s: Sns BY TaS o psl 5ns led feTRnsns 70 1ssS ras
making, ia tho present case, tho valuo Of the In
tangible property 9350000, and tho tangible
property "5271, 900, while tho ontire property,
tangible and intangible which consiBts Of tho
hotel and tue leases, s really only the latter sum
Of 1871 900.
Complainant also states TINT tho capital stock
Of the Company waB worth nothing on May !
Inst, tho entiro property not being equal to the
bonded debt. Tho corporate character Of the
Company may now be obtained, or 4 similar
character, by any one under tho present lawH,
and hence tho special privilege IL not worth any
thing. Complainant claims TINT tho valuation
was not mado In accordance with 1aw. It nog~
lected to give Its capital stock in ita liang or iss
indehtefneBs, because mother tho Auditor nor
tho Aaseasor wished 1t, In the forms or instruc-
tom, III conformity with which tho roturna wore
made. In default Of such return the Auditor
was to make out aa best le could: !, the namo
aud location Of complainant, 9, tho amount of
tho oapita1 stock 3, tho amount paid up; 4, the
market valuo, OF in default Of thnt tho actual
cash value s, the total amount Of indebted
ness; G. the asaesEed valuation OF its tangible
property, which schedule being placed before
tic State Board would fnrnish basis for taxa.
ton. No such information was furnished, but
tho Donrd made their naaoasmont without any
information M to the oompany's property, while
tion on request.
The Auditor hns, under the direction Of aait
Board, certified the Hnid sum of s350,000 to tht
County Clerk, On which to extend taxes agnins
tho Company Oh its franchise, and complainant
therefore asks an injunction. ....
| Mr. Thomas T. Witlrow, on behalf OF the Ho-
tel Company, reviewed tho principal points Of
the bill on the motion for an injunction, lii
strong roliance being on tho fact that the State
Board did not hive any data on which to bust
their estimate and that their acts wore Like
those OF star chanlber-uttorly irresponsible
thnt they had no Jurisdiction, except as it wal
furnished by the Agsesaors schedule, and tha
the State Board had no power to mako any as
Hessment or basis for taxation Of themselves.
Mr. EdHall argued the case on behalf Of tux
State, and, among other things, urged that the
Court, not being an assessos, would not inter
foro because the assessment was little toe
high or too low that the capital stock was tht
Bamo as capital. Tho only way in which sucl
property Of a corporation can ho taxed was by
allowing groat latitude in tho rules, and they
themselves mako them. Suppose, as III thu
prosont case, The stock in tho shareholders handi
waa worth nothing, bnt several hundred dollars
worth Of property was in the bands Of the Com
pany, 1t ought to bo taxed. A natural rersot
would not bo allowed to deduct his book dobts
nor should o company be allowed a greater I'M
munity.
In regard to tho question Of schedules no
having been nude, thoro was no allegation thai
the Auditor had not done his duty; it wat
the l,ounden duty Of tho Company to make state
nlents Of their condition !; the Auditor WAS no.
bound to bring them to tho Company. Ths
failure to file the lists did not abaolye the 8tatt
Board In tho performance or itB sworn duty.
Tho other poats were mainly those alread,
urged In tho other test caao, which wero fully re
ported at tue time. The case WIS taken undo
advlaemont by Judges Farwoll and Williams, ant
conclusion ia expected In about week or tor
days. Tho result in this case viii probabl,