Sacramento daily record-union., 1883-09-19
THE TAX DECISION.

The decision of the United States Cir.
cult Court, Justice Field and Judge Sawyer
presiding, relative TO The constitutionality
of our system of assessing the property Of
railroad corporations, has been rendered,
and is adverse to the position taken by the
State. This was what those who have
given thoughtful attention to the questions
involved have expected, and is the result
which it was pointed out during the new
Constitution campaign would be reached
If that document WAS approved. Ever
since its adoption the people have been
finding fault with it, snd the Courts have
been engaged in che vain endeavor to
reconcile il to Itself and the laws superior
to it, The conclusion reached by the
Court, it must appear to the candid mind,
is justified by the Interpretation given to
the law and the Constitution according 30
the accepted rules. Bat there is no need
to engage in extended comment upon it !;
the Court is clear in its views, and ex.
pressed them with much elaboration. The
tribunal holds that the Constitution
OF this State, wherein it provides that a
mortgage On property shall be treat.
ed, for all the purposes of assessment
and taxation, as IN interest in the prop
erty, but especially excepts railroads from
the provision chat the value of the prop
erty, less the value of the security, shall
be assessed and taxed to the owner of the
property, ia in conflict with and opposed to
the spirit of the Fourteenth Amendment
of the Federal Constitution, SO far as such
exception Is concerned. That amendment
prohibits any State from denying to any
person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws. This protection,
says the Court "impliss not only that the
means which the laws afford for the pro-
lection of private rights shall be equally
accessible to every one, but that no one
shall be subject to any greater burdens or
charges than such as are equally imposed
upon sll others under like circumstances,
and that persons are not deprived Of such
equal protection in their property because
they associate themselves in corpora
tion that the power of State over cor.
poration by it's reservation OF right to al
ter, amend or repeal it's charter, is limited
to what the State grants; that though 8
State may prescribe the conditions upon
which the powers granted to corporation
shall be exercised AID the franchise en-
ioyed, and may modify its grant in this re-
spees at its pleasure, the property acquired
by the corporation in the exercise Of It's
power or otherwise is protected by the
guarantees of the Constitution to the same
extent as the property of individuals. y
1t would seem that this should be
satisfactory to the most prejudieed
antagonist of the railroad corporations,
since it is purely legal question as to the
power Of the State to discriminate-in i'm
posing taxAtion-sgainsS the property of
railroad corporations, and because the
holding is in accord with the ordinary die
tates of equity and the principles at the
foundation of republican form of govern
mens. The decision of the Court does
not give warrant for the charge that
greater privileges are demanded in behalf
of persons associated in corporate ca
pacity, but it does maintain the reasona.
BILE doctrine that no greater burdens of
taxation should be imposed upon the prop
erty of persons so held than upon the
property held by them or others as natural
persons. OF course the question involved
will go up On appeal TO the Supreme Court
of she United States, and until that tri-
bunal shall have passed finally upon the
iesles their debate will be largely profit
lee.