Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1885-01-17
RAILROAD TAX CASES.
STATEMENT BY THE ATTORNEY.
GENERAL CONCERNING THEM,
As Given in His Official Report to
the Governor - Some Caus-
tic Remarks.

tic Remarks.
When | entered upon the duties of this
Office found that suits had been brought
for the entire amount, taxes, pen
alties interest, and attorneys fees due from
railroads operated in more than one county
in this State, except a few cases which |
have since brought and disposed of as l
will state in another place. | found that
nearly all these cases had been removed
from the State Courts to the United States
Circuit Court, and that the Attorney-Gen-
eral of this State was charged with control
of all this litigation. | found that COM
promises of the demands of the State had
been made by Boards of County Superyi-
sors and District Attorneys My predeces-
sor in Office had endeavOred to set aside
such compromises, and | pressed the mo-
tons for that purpose until the removal of
the cases, in which the motions were pend
ing, into Circuit Court, compelled me to
wait the decision of the questions involved
in all the cases by the United States ST.
preme Court before any correction of the
illegal compromises will be possible.
From great number OF suits brought by
the counties against the railroads, the suit
of San Mateo county was selected before
least so far as the construction of the Fed
eral Constitution was involved. That case
was tried in the Circuit Court and decided
adversely to the State. An appeal was
taken and the cause advanced upon the
calendar of the United States Supreme
Court, very deliberately argued and sub
mitted. No decision was given, but, after
some considerable delay, an intimation,
upon what authority | do not know, was
given to this office that the Supreme Court
required the trial of six additional cases.
that all the issues might be fully before it.
The six cases were tried in the United
States Circuit Court and substantially the
same judgment was rendered as in the San
Mateo case From these judgments ! have
caused appeals to be taken. A motion to
advance all these cases on the calendar has
been made and denied.
After the decision Of the last six cases
proposals of compromise in ali the remain
ing cases were offered by the railroad COM
panies and rejected In a few days after
this negotiation was made public. a news
paper (Chr0nicie) suggested a settlement of
all the tax cases by Il payment by the rail-
road of the face of the assessment for the
years 18S0-91-S2. Without giving the rea-
son, it is enough to say the Attorney Gen
eral favored this proposition, although 1t
contemplated a remission of the penalties
interest and attorneys fees. After much
and somewhat acrimonious discussion this
plan was abadoned.
The Attorney General then called up all
the cases upon the docket against the rail
road companies for the years 1SS0-1-2 for
trial in the Circuit Courts Except the cases
which were affected by the attempted COM
promises of the District Attorneys and Su-
pcrvisors, which were left as they were on
the docket. The Court pronounced judg
ment against the plaintiff, as it had done
on the former trials. The attorney for the
railroad then moved to set aside this judg-
ment, and have judgment entered in favor
of the plaintiff for the face of the tax-stat-
ing in open Court as a condition of the
judgment for the face of the tax, that it did
not bar the right of the State TO appeal To
the United States Supreme Court on the
question of penalty, interest and attorneys
fee, or in any way affect the rights of the
State upon those issues. With this under
standing, which was not entered on the
minutes, but formally and fully expressed
in stipulation between the parties, the
AttOrney-General consented to the judg-
ment The taxes, amounting to $470,475 0S,
were paid, and the Judgment satisfied. The
| Controller of State notified the county Off
! GERS not to receive the money due, as he
would not settle their accounts. Notwith-
standing this menace all the counties inter-
ested have received their proportions,
amounting to $500 ,039 49, except the coun-
ties of Placer, San joaquin and Contra
Costa. | have on hand, subject to their
order, SAL 435 20. / have some months
since sued out u mandate from the Su-
preme Court, 10 compel the county of
Contra Costa to receive the sum TO which
it is entitled. Every technical defense has
been interposed, and, as yet, no decision
has been gwen.
Upon the rendition OF these judgments,
and their satisfaction by this office, the
| Legislature was convened in extra session,
and its attention particularly called to the
compromise which they were informed
by the Executive message had been effect
ed, to the great loss of the State. An in
vestigation was ordered by the Legislature,
| and prosecuted before the Judiciary Com
mittee of the House of Representatives. A
majority of the committee reported that the
| interests of the State had been protected by
an appeal properly taken. A minority Of
the committee reported exactly the reverse
and, following the spirit of the Executive
| message. pronounced the AttorneyGeneral
guilty Of eiecting a compromise of the dues
to the State of many hundreds of thousands
of dollars. The House of Representatives
rejected the report Of the majority and APP
proved the report of the minority, and by a
vote of A to Is, pronounced censure, of
which the brutal cruelty was only To be eX-
cused by its brutal ignorance. The only
| question involved was the validity of the
appeal. AS soon as possible, the appeal
was perfected in one Of the cases in which
the alleged compromise had been made
| San BernardinO VS. Railroad Company,
| and placed upon the calendar Of the United
States Supreme Court A motion was made
to strike that case from the calendar on the
grounds set forth in the minority report,
and the Court unanimously, and from the
| Bench, declared the appeal regularly taken,
| completely sustaining the majority OF the
| Judiciary Committee and this office. To
avoid the expense of appeals in all the cases
| in which the course above indicated was
| pursued by me, a stipulation has been en-
| tered into by which all those cases will
| abide the decision in the one case in which
an appeal has been taken.
| The taxes on the railroad company for
the year 1888 having become delinquent,
| suit was brought under q new Act Stat.
1883 by attorneys appointed by the Con-
| troller. These suits were removed from
| the State Court to the United States Circuit
| Court and came under the control Of this
| Office. A tender of sixty per cent OF the
face of the tax had been made by the de
| PENDANT | moved the Court for an order
against defendant to make good the tender
which was granted by the Court and obeyed
by defendant. The money, amounting TO
S335,377 10, was paid to me- which, with
the balance from the years lSS0-S1- 50,
leaves III my hands the sum of 1914, S12 30
The suits were then submitted upon the
evidence given in the former trials, with
some additional evidence made necessary
by certain changes in the methods of assess
ment and judgment entered for defendants.
have not incurred the expense of taking
appeals in these cases, Us it seems certain
that some definite settlement of the great
Questions between the railroad company
and the State will be reached before the
| time limiting the right Of appeal lapses.
If necessary, can and will take them up
before my term of Office expires. Under