Eureka daily sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1871-1887, 1875-10-03
WILL 1T PAY.

lO-IIlOIIOW 10 th0 ttiO hACo ny bhO
Board of Equalization for the mana
gers of the Central Pacific Railroad
Company to appear and show
why the taxable portion of the road
passing through this county should
not be raised from $4,000 to $4,000 per
mile. There are in this State ASP miles
of the Central Pacific Railroad, only
35T miles of which are within the
limits of Eureka county. We have it
counties through which the road runs
have accepted the return of $4,000 per
mile. This leaves Eureka county
alone with it's 35T miles of road to
make the fight for all the rest of the
State, provided the Board of Equali-
cation shall adhere to its expressed in
tention to increase the valuation to $780,
900 per mile. The question now claim
ing, or the mi that should claim, the
earnest attention of the board and tax
payers generally, is this: "Will it
pay?" We are free to admit that we
think not. In round numbers the net
gain, by reason of the proposed raise,
would amount to about $500. Ofthis
sun a little over one-tfird goes to the
State, thus reducing u pro rata Of the
difference between an assessment of
$4,000 and $4,000 per mile to 5 $4,000.
To gain this $1,000 We should. in all
human probat llity, have to embark in
a tedious and expensive litigation, the
Railroad Company, in the meantime,
keeping back the whole of its taxes,
amounting say to $4,000, until a final
decision was had. In the event of a
law suit, be it remembered, the State
bears no part OF the expense. To COM
bat John B. FELTON,, Judge Sanderson,
and the other brilliant legal lights reg
ularly employed by the Railroad Com
pany, we should be compelled to re-
tain extra counsel, besides being in
volved in all sorts of of costs and court
fees. To pay this extra counsel
and the other expenses incident to a
suit at law, we would be forced to is
sue scrip at the rate of nearly two dol
lars for one, redeemable in the end,
whether we won or lost, dollar for dol
lar. Is the hope of gaining $1,000 suf-
ficient to justify these hazardous
chances? Does a cautious and sound
public policy warrant so great a risk
on the part of u Board of Equaliza-
ton, more particularly when it is con-
sidered, as it should be, that through
some unforeseen bubble Of the law We
may lose all? Again, it should be borne
in mind that we are entirely at the mercy
of the Railroad Company. Ultimate
success on our part would simply re-
suit in the railroad putting up its tariff
Tor freights and fares until it was
dorbly reimbursed for the amount it
might be required to expend in the
payment of extra taxes and all ex-
penses of lit igation; so in any event
we have all to lose and nothing to gain
by engaging in a tedious and expen-
sive law suit with this gigantic mo-
nOpoly. AS we view it, this is not a
question of principle, but one merely
of policy with indisputable economic
reasoning to back it. We believe, and
have always maintained, that the rail-
road does not bear a just share of the
public burdens, but this is not the
question to be considered by the Board
of Equalization. The highest and
most important duty devolving upon
that body is the careful protection of
the best interests of the county. Can
we afford, with u paltry 35X miles
of road, 70 make a fight with the Rail-
road Company, possibly running
through all OF the courts, both State
and Federal? This is the plain prop
osition and the one to be passed
upon by the Board of Equalization to-
morrow. VIZ have thrown out these
suggestions In no dictatorial spirit, but
wholly with the view, rs we believe, OF
promoting the general veal of our
growing young county; and to the
opinions herein imperfsctly Expressed
we invite the c~onsiderate attention Of
the Board.