The silver state., 1888-06-18
RAILROAD LANDS.

Judge DlRelOW Vi tuc DiopiiSO OouA' va
Nevada has rendered an important de-
cision in the case of the State of Nevada
va. the Central Pacific Railroad Com
pany. The Assessor of Washoe county
last year assessed lao, $50 acres OF land,
alleged to be the property of the railroad
company, at S7O,275, the taxes upon
which amounted to 81, ,2S4 50. The rail.
road company refused to pay the taxes,
and the District Attorney of Washoe
county brought suit for their recovery.
The complaint was in the form prescribed
by Section l, LOG of the General Statutes
Of Nevada, and the answer set up four
defenses: First, payment of taxes upon
q portion of the land; I'd, denial that
another portion OF the land is now, or
was when assessed, the property OF the
defendant; Sd, that at the time the line
of the railroad was definitely fixed,
another portion of the land was owned or
possessed by pre.emption, homestead aud
other claimants, and 4th, that another
portion of the lands have not been select
ed by the defendant nor set off, certified
or listed to the defendant by the land
department of the United States, nor
has said department. ever held, decided
or determined that any of said lands were
within the grants made by Congress- nor
whether they were mineral or Don- min
eral in character, nor whether any of
them were covered by homestead, pre-
emption or other lawful claims.
An amendment to the answer denies
that defendant has any title to the lands
than that derived under the Acts of
Congress of July /, 1862 and of July ?,
1854, or that patents have been issued
for the lands, and alleges that it does not
know whether it will be able to obtain
soch patents, as it has no knowledge of
what the future action of the land de-
partment may be.
It was admitted that the first and sec
ond clauses of the answer state good
defense as to the lands therein described,
and the only question at Issue was
whether, as alleged in the fourth clause,
the Government still has an interest in
the lands, which would exempt them
from taxation under the General Stat
utes.
The Court holds that the great bulk of
the lands upon which taxes have been
demanded do not come within any of the
exceptions specified in the answer. They
were granted to the company, and it is
not necessary that patent should have
issued to render them taxable, and sew
eral authorities are quoted to sustain this
view of the case.
To the objection of defendant that the
lands cannot be taxed because the Gov
ernnent has mortgage upon them, the
Court holds that it is only the prop' rty
of the United States that cannot be
taxed, and the opinion closes as follows:
"No attempt has been made to tax
this mortgage. Only the land has been
taxed, and that, have concluded, is the
property of the railroad company, and
net of the United States. The mere fact
shat the Government has mortgage or
Zen upon it does not make it the Gov.
ernment's property. The mortgage is
spon the road as we'll as the land, and ii
this argument is good, no taxes whatever
could be collected from the company.
'In all the litigation concerning the
taxation of railroad lands, it has never
been hell, nor, as Tar as / have seen, even
suggested that they were not taxable
seoa any other ground except that the
Nnited States had clam upon them Tor