New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-01-03
yNEwYoRK DAILY TRIBUNE WEDNESDAY JANUARY srEN PAGES
The process of COnscatiOn and not of taxation

C36 n ]. Law. 7O)
Uniformity IN faring implies equality in The burdsn Of
uniformity IN he mode Of assessment as e as IN ne rate
Of tdrdtt0n.
As the foundation Of all Jus. and equal taxation Is the
OF the property taxed that ia the ascertain
value IN order that the tax may be estma ed
according to some ratio to the value, m % 9ae ~ a
sessment well in the rate OF faxatlo or 20 quoe
the same thought: Uniformity in taxing implies
equality In the burden OF taxation. and THIS eqini OF
burden cannot exist without uniformity IN ths o"G VI
assessment well as in the rate OF taxa ION Eh
change Bank OF Columbus Vs. Hines, . ONO 81 KEEP ~
The scheme Of araon prescribed by he Constitution or
a ddgrani departure iron, NE rule Of equaB and TT
formity essential to equality IN The distribute" OF me
burdens Of gorernnenL
look at the scheme of taxation prescribed by
the Constitution OF California for the property OF ra
road companies, shall perceive that IL eNhlotS ma
grant departure from the rule of equality ana uniformity
80 essential TO equality IN the rDutiOn OF te 1uuen
M government Whenever an individual holds property
encnmbercd with mortgage ne Is assessed at iIs vane
after aeduciing from II the amount OF the uorlghGe
railroad company holds property subject to mort
eace is ASSESSED at its full value without any dcdue
ton for the mortgages that Is, as though the properly
was unincumDered. The inequality and discriminating
character Of the procedure viii be apparent OF an Illus
tration given by couns IL suppose private person
farm which is valued 100000. aud IL encountered
with mortgage amounting to $4,000; he 49, IN that
case assessed $4,000; II the rate OF taxation Is per
cent he would pay 800 taxes II railroad CORPORATION
owns an adjoining tract worth 100000, which 10 also
encumbered OF a mortgage for $4,000 IL wonl DO as
sese for CO., and be required to pay S2OOO taxes
or five times as much rs the private person. There Ia
here odscrimnaton too pGpabe and gross TO pe ques
toned and such is the nature ofthe discrimination lnane
araipst the Southern Pacific Railroad Company IN the
taxation of its property Nothing can DC cedrer thu
that tine rule of equality ana uniformity is thus ehey
The case Of People Va. Weaver 10 Otto, 500. dec led
by supreme CJur respecting the taxation OF shares
OF the National banks may be cited In tbs connection
Without the permission OF Congress the shares OF these
banks could not he taxed by the states Congress gave
the permission on condition that tine taxation should not
be gIcae rate tnan assessed on Ohef ncney cap
itel In the hands OF inGlyidual ct%chs Oh VIC $50 anu
that the snares owned by n91reSldentS ne ott'c
should he taxed at the place where the oank Is oc .c
M :. sec. J2l9D IN me case cl.,u tnr 1t. w
r,ard such taxation, Isl That inc prohibition lnposu
by congress inst discrimination ad reference 20 ine
entire process OF assessment, ana cu'cd tlo 'uatl"n
OF the well rs tne rate OF percentage oatHe
~ that Statute 81 Ne"-f9fK' "nich e.IhoNsn ,,
mode of assessment ~ whlch bIci shhIeH Weic
valued higher IN proportion 10 lnelr rear Nu.dc ~
OF er moneycd gaVili' wac mcoh4tI VIZ nc H. o
u0n although tr same eiceht"sc On sl.I '..i ,, o
was levied; and, 81, ttat situate winch lcimllcn
patty to dedic ms dents from tue Valuation OF III, r
aOna property, except 20 ilDch hs c plHs,,i u u
shares taxed the saare- az greater rate than oter
examination against sua ts OF iOnal Banks IA he tax
atIOn system OT NcW-1oik shir 10 WAT We hold 10
be discrimination asas iauFJad corporations III the
taxation system Of California, -
In tuc c.sc OF tine National Bank vs. Bution, decided
Inc Wea., case was a'lif'ucd was ued Lat tue
taxation o. -Gars IN inc National Banks under crrN-
cr w. Gei7cr r'in ib,i .,.s,..d value lie amount Of
MS bona ndc Indebtedness, wncn was alowedin ne case
nation against ,he act or Congress, aud Illegal
CLASSIFICATION 80 ANSWER.
II Il no answer 10 this discrimination 10 say that prop
ery in the stl.e may he diyioci INTO caSse ana Gig,
property may he classified Tor purposes of taxa Ion.
pers nal property 20 auoncr rate Properly IN par'icu
lar dstrc MAY be taxed Tor local purposes, whilst prop
erty elsewhere may be exempt Taxation on busldeas IN
inc form OF licenses may also according 10 me CALI
ing equation licensed, aud the e1tcht OF business
trans CO but even tnrn there nu- oe uniformity Oh
cuargcs with pect the same calling OF occupation
IN the same locality lbs. however on with the taxa.
ton OF property mat We are CONCERNED IN s case ana
Tie whole object Of classifying property IA that eacn
class may be- subjected TO spcCinl rate OF taxation
There difference ~ che rate prescribed by tue aw
of the state for the property OF railroad corporations ana
tue prescribed lOr tDo property oi Individuals Ihrre
is only Tor all property Iherc u, therefore, no
case Presented the application of the doctrine Oi
classification. TIE determination compl1lhed OF aIscs
from the different rnc adopted ~ asccr aihing We 1tlAe
lie properly OF railroad corporations - Dass Tor tN
aion no, roi any different rc OF taxation men tbc
value ~ established. IN all taxes upon property! WuAt
ever It's nature the properly Is taken - ferc-
seDung pecuniary yalde, A. etahdug Tor 30 mlch
money invested TIE TAX ~ The rae per ceutlm o. TINS
pecuiary value. The value being n-ccrmincd the law
zcs tno rate The ground Of complaint here Is mat the
law requires higher value 10 pt p4acru upon tie ~
teudaups property tnan upon toe properly oIhd'lduais
similarly encountered. or rathr requires ,g Ss,es oI OF
tue deendaufs property III esthAl"E ~ N1,ne 20 use
gard aud aside certain elem MS materially Hneclhs
il amount which to be considered IN estimating the
value OF tie property % individuals. IL 10 not ASST
fyIng property To- make this distinction In determining
To nrooerty OF certain pAfi6s which lnor,Snee
upon IL shall Dee asrcsscd 49, IT. value aicr 'educus lhc
mortgage. and that thc pr1pesij oi ohrF trt X, also
having mortgage upon H. shall Dct-xcd az o. vi Vidr
without any deduction lhat is no. pIoIdlts vI " or
AnAtAsf'ii
Du Tor unequal taxation according 20 the Character oil
tae OwHcr
frira corporations pcrsons cfhin nc meaning Of
hc trst 81 cii0n ~ ~. i>"'t. M AHtH1f" d.d are tI
GHcd So Jar 0er properly % e,"ecr"ea, q no eq"di
DtOieciiOH 81 me htirG
IL he defendant. being corp ration. person within
the meaning of Ge fourteenth amendment 80 - to Oc
entitled win rrspect 10 H. poVery go the cqid piOcc
ton OF the lava I"r !'hfu"d c"u r.! =" t'c PAM H.
and the Attorney of the state tab" the mega
i've OF this question: and "-seit WIN nu,i c',il,,n -
that the Hmendm, nt ap e-' ana - lhlnn'n ~ "Pls
ony To the newly made cltzcu, OF the African race ana
should Dc limited 10 tncir protection. ,..
ID is undoubtedly true tAdt Toe amendment hAu IT.
oripin ia a uurUo-. 10 these newly mnGC cit
liens the iUli enjoyment OF their iicrdo. Nhch luc
amrndmcl, aboislug slavery ana H'oiuhlhI! 7eINl
tudc was adopted. there were Mcn ~ Congress VINO
believed that u was intended To in"Ac every one porn
within the United statcs H''lhhil am a. 7n'" 10
give lin the night to pursue his haplhrss ia inc
ordinary vacations OF III slp'c' 10 no Ir7tI " 80
the fruits OF his labor. They therefore proposed Inc
DrN & Of ~, which we hive sfifcd Notwithstanding
his expression OF the National Legislature a. 10 the
purpose of Amendment the nc"iy mnde citizens
subjected In several OF tue states To NAil9us us
abilities and burdens, ana Cuftdllcd OF ih'f llbh- 10
such an cAtcnt that their freedom became Oh tie
value To quote IRON tue opinion Oh ll JuS'c Aiil'ci'
speaking for the Court In the slaughter House cu-eH
towns in any other character than AS nenu! servants
They were required 10 reside on and cultivate the soil
excluded many occupations OF gain aud hire and
were not permitted 10 give testimony ia lhs court VI
any case where white man was party IL was shid
thst their H. e. at the mercy 81 bad men, either
taI ,b iar tnr their projection were inefficient or
W 49,
ably much exaggcrau0n in what was reported OF ther
treatment but the statements Inndc prOdlced pro
found iupre.siOn upon Congress The validity OI tho
Civil Rights Act also called la question: ana III SOME
instances was adjudged ~ state Courts 10 nc Invalid
Reports also prevailed that loyal men 0f te Hohh were
treated with exceptional hnrshness and that men from
the North seeking residcLce there were met win
marked hostility and aversion. IL Is not SURPRISING
that such was the fnc for Notwithstanding thc ueIy
courage and martial spirit OF her people thef oniohs
had gone down before the forces OF the Union WIN tue
sound of the tread OF the victorious army SIN ringing III
their ears; with the dcsOlaOns ot war al hIOuhl the
and the sudded rupture OF Their social fcln0hs D inc
emancipation Of their former slaves IL wOuu nave Dcc
nIrie fl bitterness owuId their recent foes hnd not
fingered In their hearts, and been exhibited ia ther con
Duct proud and brave people feel more keenly hhh
others tho sting of lcent Undoubtedly much niscOn-
cepon falsehOOd mingled with the statements hnde
respecting their nctiOn nevertheless, tbey lei 10 inc
ntroducton into Congress OF the proposition Tor the
Fourteenth Amendment. The discussion which foi
lowed indicated that the purpose OF iis trainers ana "a
vocotes was 10 obviate objections legislation similar
IN Thai contained in the first section OF the Cy Rights
fnr he possibility OF