Omaha daily bee., 1884-04-14
RAILWAY TAXATION.
An Important Decision in Regard to
Assessments in Terminal
Cities,
Council Bluffs Should Insist on Its
Rights.

The showing Of facts and figures by
THE BEE in regard to the taxation of
rail ways in Council Bluffs has opened the
eyes of many who were before ignorant
of the real condition of affairs. One
citizen remarked to The BEE man that
it was no use, however, 'there daren't
anybody here try to tax railway property
as it ought to be, for if they did they
wouldn't get elected again, and they
know it." That may be, but the people
are entitled to the facts and then if they
prefer to lie down and keep
quiet, that is their own lookout.
In connection with this showing of facts
there comes the news of an important
decision delivered in Toledo, Ohio, last
Thursday by the district court, which
hits the point pretty snugly, and is of
such interest as to merit attention, the
Ohio law being similar to that of Iowa,
and the portion of Toledo, the case is
similar to that of Council Bluffs. The
case was the Wabash, st. Louis 81 Pacific
Railway company VS.. Kelsey, treasurer
of Lucas county. An appraisal of the
main track on the usual mileage basis
had been made in 1881, to which had
been added to the duplicate in this city
the assessed value of the company's valu-
able terminable property located here.
The company paid this tax under pro-
test, claiming that all the property
should be apportioned among all the
counties through which the road posses.
The court, after citing the laws relating
to the assessment and collection of taxes
on railway property in cities and towns,
said:
'There is great advantage to q railroad
in passing through or having a terminus
at a large city or in other populous places
where 1t acquires a large portion of its
business, and where of necessity its prop
erty must be valuable, and we cannot see
why it should not pay the same rate of
taxes or such property that private per-
Sous do, while there is justice in the
manner of taxing the rolling stock, as it
has no permanent location, but is nova
BILE, passing from one place to another,
in this case both within and without this
state. Sec. 2 of Art. IL of our constitu-
ton provides that taxation shall be by a
uniform rule, and Sec. a of Art. 13 pro-
vides that the property of corporations
now existing, or hereafter created, shall
be subjected to taxation the same as the
property of individuals, but the plaintiff
in error proposes that a part of the as
sessed value of its property in Toledo
shall by a legal sleight of hand be trans
ported to some rural district where it
shall be subject to a much less degree of
taxation than property of equal value
belonging to individuals and situated in
Toledo.
1--WE hold, first, that the rolling stock
should be apportioned to each county,
city, village and township through which
the road runs in proportion that the
length of such road in such county, city,
village and township bears to the entire
length thereof in all the counties through
which it runs Second, the fixed prop
erty, including the road-bed, should be
apportioned to each county, city, village
township through which the road runs in
the same proportion that the value in
each bears to the total value in all.
Third, the value of the company's mon
eys and credits should be apportioned to
each county, city, village and township
through which the road runs in the same
proportion as the fixed property. In this
case the plaintiff in error should find no
fault, for its road-bed was apportioned in
the same manner as the rolling-stock
was, to which it was not entitled. The
judgment below is affirmed"
The case will be carried up to the
supreme court.