The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1892-12-21
THE ASSESSOR WAS RIGHT.
And the Banks Must Pay the Tax,
Says Judge Zane.
! CIVIL RIGHTS QUESTION.
Restaurants May Exclude Negroes,
Says Judge Anderson.
Contractor HarEins Arrested for EN-
bezzling Horse-AIexander's Credit
.ors Want the Receiver Removed
Receiver Lawrence's Suits.

Judge Zane rendered his decision yes
terday morning in the bank tax cases
against the city and county collectors.
The opinion was lengthy but his honor
held in substance the foilowing:
Section 2O14 provides: "There was no
exemption provided for in assessing the
stock of national banks to the exclusion
of deeds secured by mortgage. Of course
if the national bank was assessed upon its
stock, at its par value, and the state
bank was not assessed upon its property,
and if from that property all deeds Sc
cured by mortgages were excluded, it
would be, in effect, assessing the national
bank at higher rate than the territorial.
The one assessment would be on
the property of the corporation and
the other on it's stock, which latter
presumably represented the property of
the corporation; and if the national bank
was assessed at its full market value and
the territorial banks property might be
two-thirds, or all of it, as sometimes
seems to be the case, as in debts secured
by mortgages, then the territorial bank
competed with the national bank under
very advantageous circumstances.
The national banking act of 1861 pro-
vided that the stock of the national bank
should not be taxed at greater rate than
such capital in the hands of the individ-
ual or in the state bank. In these cases
before the court no discrimination was
made by the assessor in favor of the terri
tor1al as against the national bank.
The objection was made by the territor-
ial banks that their debts secured by
mortgages were not exempt. The assessor
in making his assessment of those banks,
in effect followed the provision of the
statute, that where the property of the
bank was not taxable, then he assessed
the shares. AS to the lions Savings
bank, the evidence showed that he took
the value of the capital stock and did not
assess it's property further than to assess
the real estate. 1t was hardly to
be presumed that the legislature would
have passed law by which bank might
be started in this territory upon a certain
capital, put all its money in mortgages,
and so escape all taxation. If such a rule
as that were applied to these banking cor
porations they might escape taxation al
together by simply loaning out all their
money on mortgaged security. Indeed it
appeared from the testimony here that
some of the banks came pretty nearly do
ing that, and now they came forward and
asked that they be not taxed. They
adopted banking as business, with the
intention Of making money out of it; and
there was no reason why their property
should not be taxed. The court was in
clined to think that the system which had
been adopted by the assessor was, in sub
stance, correct. There was somesubstan-
tial justice in it, and where that was the
case the court of equity would not inter-
fere. 1t did not appear that the assessor
Intentionally adopted rule by which the
real estate of the city was assessed above
or below the market value. He might
chance to commit errors of Judgment in
making these assessments, getting some
too low and others too high; but if he
exercised discretion as far as possible, the
court would not interfere.
His honor then concluded by denying
the Injunction which disposed of the
cases.
The case of the Wasatch Mining com
pany VS.. Joseph A. Jenkins ct al. was
taken up. 1t was argued by the attorneys
and submitted.
The next case called was that of r.
Voelcker VS.. Benjamin r. Hulse ct al.
which was proceeded with until the hour
for adjournment.
SHORT ORDERS.
Alb. Gibson vs.. Barney Judd; dis
missed on motion of the plaintiff.
William F. Cooper VS.. the Denver &
Rio Grande Express company; motion to
quash service confessed and leave given to
amend complaint.
W. L. Perry Lumber company vs.. Au-
gust Trippman; five days additional given
in which TO answer. 80
Sarah Houghton ct al. VS.. John j.
Bynon; fifteen days additional time
allowed to file statement on motion for a
new trial.
William Fennemore VS.. Henry Barnes
ct al; continued.
Mary Waring VS.. F. j. Leonard, COL
lector; injunction. denied and case dis