Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1885-11-19
THE KENTUCKY RAILROAD CASE.
What Application, if Any, tho Decision
Has Upon the California Cases.
IS. L. Bulletin, November 18th.

mas upon ttlt SditiOTDia Eases.
IS. F. Bulletin, November lsth.1
a lawyer familiar with the litigation in
the California railroad cases saws The
Kentucky tax cases, which were cases on
writ of error from the Supreme Court of
Kentucky, were decided on last Monday bv
the Supreme Court of the United States
The decision of the Kentucky Court was
against the railroad companies The opin-
ions of Judges Field and SAWYER in the
San Mateo and Santa Clara cases were cited
in the Kentucky Court, and the Judges in
their opinion commented upon them, con-
ceding generally their correctness as ap-
plicable TO the facts of the California tax
cases, but held that the cases which they
had under consideration were not within
the principles of those decisions. The
Supreme Court of the United States in its
decision substantially follows that of the
Kentucky Courts. The decision in the
Kentucky case is, substantially, that the
Fourteenth Amendment, which provides
that mo State shall deprive any person of
lie, liberty or property without due pro-
cess OF law, nor deny to any person within
Its jurisdiction the equal protection OF the
law is applicable to the taxing power.
ami does prevent the assessment of a tax
without due notice and opportunity to be
heard. The Supreme Court also decides.
as did the Circuit Court of California. that
property could be classified for the purpose
OF taxation, but that the fact that one
tribunal assessed one class OF property and
another tribunal another class. did not of
Itself alone constitute discrimination with
in the meaning Of the Fourteenth Amend.
ment.
In the Kentucky cases the construction of
statute OF a State was involved. which the
Supreme Court of Kentucky and the Su-
preme Court of the United States both held
did provide for notice and did give an OPP
portunity ~ be heard
In the California cases the power exer-
cised by the State Board of Equalization is
exercised under q provision Of the new
Constitution, which the Supreme Court OF
the State of California has decided TO be
self-executing. and that under il the assess
ment can be made at any time and any
place and without notice to the parties in
teresfed. The decision of the State Su-
preme Court OF California is binding upon
the Supreme Court OF the United States, so
far as il constructs the provisions of our
state Constitution or. in other words, the
Supreme Court of the United States, when
il comes to consider the California tax
cases, will, according to its rule, follow the
Interpretation of The Supreme Court Of the
State, to wis that the provision Of the Con-
stitution is sef-eXecuuing, and that it does
not provide for notice nor give the parties
an opportunity to be heard.
The decision of the Supreme Court of the
United States in the railroad tax cases may
be summed up as follows:
First-That he provisions cited from the
Fourteenth Amendment are applicable to
and do limit the power of the State in re-
lation to State taxation.
Second-rliat no assessment is valid I'M
less the Law or Constitution under which
the assessment is made provides for notice,
and given an opportunity to be heard.
Phird-ihat the State may classify prop
erty for the purposes of taxation, but that
law must operate equally upon ali property
within that class.
The first aud second proposition seem to
be decisive in favor Of the California rail-
road company.
The third proposition is equally so, for
under the provisions OF the California Con-
stitution railroad property is not classified,
and is not assessed alike. For instance, all
locomotives, all rolling-stock are not as
sessed alike.
The Supreme Court in the Kentucky
cases also holds that there can be no dis
crimation between the same classes OF
property. This is in the same line as the
San Mateo and Santa Clara cases in relation
TO the deduction of mortgages from the
assessed value of lands, which deduction is
denied TO railroad companies, both as to
their land and railroad property
Judge Sanderson, we are informed, who
was present when the decision was rem
dered, telegraphs that there is nothing in
the decision antagonizing the opinions of
Judges Field and Sawyer in the San Mateo
and Santa Clara cases