Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1888-01-14
THE CAPITAL.
THE PRESIDENTS TROUBLE WITH
HIS CLOTHES.
A Would-Be Congressman Sat Upon
Railroad Tax Cases-Lamar
and Others-Etc.
lsrEc1AL DwrArcHEs TO THE REcoEp-uNIox.
RAILROAD TAX CASES.
Arguments Concluded by Creed Haym'
and Aforementioned johnson

Arguments Concluded by Creed Raymond
and Attorney-General johnson.
ICoPyighl. 1888, by The for7sia Associated Press
WASHINGTON, January 13th.-The argu-
plent in the Pacific railroad tax cases before
the Supreme Court was concluded to-day
Greed Haymond, representing the COM
pany, occupied the first two hours of the
session of the Court, and Acknowledgement
johnson. closed the case. Mr.. Raymond S
main point was in support of the COM
Dany's proposition that the provisions of
the Constitution and laws of California, in
respect to the assessment and taxation of
railroad property, operated IN more than
one county in the State and are in violation
of the fourteenth amendment to the Con-
stitution of the United States. This viola
ton, he contended, arose because the rail-
roads were Disseminated against, their
property being assessed at its full money
value, without making deduction, as in
the cases of other corporations and of na-
tural persons, for the valuation of mort
cages covering the property assessed, and
thus imposing upon the defendant unequal
burdens, and to that extent denying Il
equal protection of the laws.
He discussed the general and special sys-
tenn of taxation under the new Constitution
as to equality. He declared that the pro-
visions of the State Constitution, if en-
forced, would deprive the railroad conf
panies operating in two or more counties OF
their property, without due process OF law.
He contended that the owners of railroad
property operated in more than one county
are denied protection from the law, which
requires First, that property shall be taxed
in proportion to its value. Second, requires
such proportions to be ascertained by gen
eral law. Third, gives an appeal from the
Asse sor to another tribunal. Fourth, re-
quires the assessment to be made in the
county, and prevents its being made in
localities distant from the situation of the
property Fifth, which prescribes the
mode and manner of assessment, and sixth,
which allows deductions for Indebtedness
secured by mortgage. Each of which laws,
he said, went to the very essence of the tax
ing power.
Attorney General Johnson, ir summing
up the case, reviewed the arguments of
counsel for the company, and conroverted
their assertions. He dealt more at length
with the purely local features of the case,
explaining the laws of the State applicable
to the case the proceedings OF the State
Board of Equalization description of the
character of property sought to be taxed,
and that of such as steamers and fences,
that are exempted. Mr.. Johnson said that
iu making the Constitution the California
people created method of taxing such
property as that involved in this case.
That method was to assess the road as a
unit, to collect as unit, and to apportion
among the counties the amount so COL
lected. In harmony with that theory, the
statute was enacted to the end that if taxes
are delinquent, to bring on suit for the
whole, to recover judgment for the assess
ment as an entirety, and to distribute the
money according to the respective IN
terests of the different localities. This is a
welldefned and consistent scheme for the
assessment and collection of taxes.
The provisions of the Constitution in re-
lation to railroads, such as the defendant,
is directed to a special and distinct subject
matter. The Constitution deals with it in
dependently of, and segregates it from, the
subject of taxation generally, or as ap-
plicable to all other property not thus con-
ditioned; and therefore, to carry out this
special feature of the Constitution, the Leg
islature could make an appropriate pro-
vision for collecting such tax. This was
within the legitimate exercise of the legis-
lative power to provide remedies, and espe-
cially is it within its power to provide
methods for collecting the taxes.
The Attorney General thoroughly dis
cussed the constitutional questions raised
by the defendants counsel. When deci-
sion will be reached in the case is not
known.