Eureka daily sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1871-1887, 1883-09-30


THE O. p. A09R98AENT.
The County Commissioners Of Eureka
County win sit tomorrow y . Board Of
Equalization. IT. principal work ON that
occasion will be 70 consider the petition Of
the Central Pacific Railroad Company to
reduce it, assessment from &c. 900 per
mile. the figures fixed by the Assessor, to
$40. 900 per mile, which Is An increase Of
81, 900 per mile over the assessment Of last
year.
The question will come before the
Board acting In its judicial capacity and
will be determined with reference TO law.
With the law for its guide in the prem
Uses. its function will DO simply to fix the
value Of the property in controversy. All
other matters are e~xtrinsic and should
have no weight or influence in its de-
alterations. Any consideration whatever
Of . different nature would be palpably
extra-judicial md improper. II 10 the
right that the Board will seek to discover,
and the only safe criterion Of right that
it can have 10 the law. II all resolves IL
self into this: that the Board Of Equaliza-
ton shall exercise ito best judgment ~ to
what the law il and decide thereupon &C.
cording1y.
All issues other than those Of law
should be excluded from the minds Of the
Equalizers, whose duty it is to consider all
persons alike, whether individual or cor
porate. The private history Of persons
has nothing to do with the assessment Of
their property. In law, which. in axiom
ATTIC phrase. il called the perfection Of rea-
SON.. personality. ID ignored. A man or .
corporation may be considered in his or
it, locality ~ . public enemy, and the pop
ular notion may be correct; il 90 the law
provides specific remedies in case OF crime
or misdemeanor. But the rights
Of acquiring and enjoying property
are inalienable and sacred. Pro-
lection is guaranteed 70 them and they are
not lawfully susceptible to covert attack.
But, dropping generalities for the mo-
ment, it is proper to say explicitly that
in tho case under discussion the Board OF
Equalization will transcend it's functions
and fall from its presumed dignity - q
judicial body to regard the Central Pacific
Railroad in any other light than - . tax
payer, . taxpayer having equal rights with
and entitled 10 the same delicate consid-
GRAFTON that q private person may lawfully
demand and insist upon. And yet, to be
perfectly definite and final on this point,
the Board will be bound TO consider the
Central Pacific Railroad Company as a
mere taxpayer, and not to look upon that
corporation, in the light Of any possible
prejudice that may exist against it, as a
public freighter and transportation agent.
The law with regard to fixing property
values for the purposes Of taxation is volum-
inous and complex. To discuss it in
these columns. had we space for that pur-
pose. would be sheer presumption-an I'M
professional invasion Of . sphere already
occupied by the profoundest intellects in
the jurisprudence Of the world. The law
on the subject in this State, for evident
reasons. is comparatively meager; but what
there is bears directly upon the point al
issue. We refer to the decision Of Justice
Beatty, contained in the tenth volume Of
Nevada Supreme Court Reports. on . case
Of the State against the Central Pacific
Railroad Company. taken from appeal from
the District Court in Wsshoe. Justics
Beatty, II we are able to comprehend his
opinion, decides, to boil it down, tbs. the
limit Of the taxable value Of railroad ID
the cost Of construction. II may be taxed
on : less valuation, but never on more.
Hence, it would seem, ~ this is the highest
authority in the State with which there ID
no conflict, that the Board Of Equalisa-
ton will have merely to determine the
present COST Of constructing the Central
Pacific Railway and tax the company 20
cordingly. That and nothing more
Az We stated above. smphatically, the
question ID one purely Of equalization in
accordance with right and law. We be.
lieve that should be the rule for the Board
to stick to. Independent Of all eonsiders.
tions Of policy; but. other things being
equal In the argument that will doubtless
be made ct exhaustive length pro and CON,
It may be we'll enough for the Board "a
give some weight to the question Of expe'
diency. which IL sometimes undistinguish.
able from abstract right itself. We refer "a
the probability or improbability Of collect.
ing taxes on the Central Pacific roadbed u
$4,000 Per mile through litigation; for Il
10 known that the company will mot pay on
that valuation until first II has exhausted
al " great = In svsry court into
which il can carry it, suit.
We have "a Is miles Of road In this
Nonnkv- Tha diAaranNA ~ xava&lor m