The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-05-27
RAILWAYS MUST PAY.



property of this plaintiff with thai placed
by II upon other roads. or portions OF
roads, within the State is innmaferfal unless
coupled with an offer 70 show an Identity
itself down 10 this: Is testimony that tao
value placed by the board was excessive
the road outside of the State were OF large
~ greater value than any similar length OF
evidsnca nm, .h ss9 M .a,,a
ton by simply dividing the total value. OF
the companys property on mileage ba-
sis. or that il failed 10 take into considera-
ton the fact OF such excessive value OF
portions outside OF the State, sufficient 10
must be answered In the negative No de-
termination OF a special board. charged
under the law with the duty of placing
impeached by such meager testimony as
presented In this record, and. notwithstand-
ing the shadow cast upon the action OF the
we are forced TO the conclusion not only
that the act Is not open 10 the objections
made to its constitutionality. but also that
there is no. sufficient testimony TO inipeach
the conclusion and determination OF the
State board. The judgment OF the Supreme
Court OF the State of Indiana will. there
fore. be affirmed.
Case No. 900. brought by the indianapolis
Vincennes Railroad Company 10 i'm
peach the assessment made by the same
board, in the same year, OF its property
Is so nearly like this in its material feat
ures that no separate statement OF the spe-
too, the Judgment OF the Supreme Court OF
the State of Indiana will be affirmed.
Justice Harlan's Dissenting Opinion.
Justice Harlan delivered brief oral dis
sent. He said. in part:
THE statute OF Indiana of March 3, 1891.
as construed by the Supreme Court OF thar
State, authorized the State Board of Tax
Commissioners in~assessing the railroad
track and rolling stock OF the company
in the State to ascertain the market value
of every kind. within and without the State.
including capital stock. bonds. earnings.
franchise. equipment. etc. and that being
done TO take as the value of the company's
track and rolling stock in Indiana for
taxation such proportion Of that aggregate
amount as the number OF miles Of road in
that State bore to the number of miles OF
its road or roads outside OF the State, and
by this rule of valuation the State Board
der this mode of assessment property was
taxed in Indiana which had no place there.
was used In interstate commerce. and could
track and rolling stock in that State. The
statute, as construed and enforced by the
State. imposed illegal burdens upon inter
state commerce under the guise OF val
uation tax upon property located within
The Justice further said:
There was some difference of opinion In
this case as to whether the State Board OF
Tax Commissioners In fact made the valua-
ton Of the railroad track and rolling stock
according to the rule which l have just
stated Even If 1 have misinterpreted the
record of the case, the question stated is
still before the court for decision for the.
offer was made in every variety OF form
by the railroad company to prove as mat
ter of fact that the tax commissioners did
proceed according TO the rule that / have
sta ted. In considering whether the judg-
ment below should be reversed, we are,
therefore, 10 take the evidence offered TO be
introduced as having been actually intro
duced, and upon that basis determine
whether the statute of the State and the
rule pursued by the commissioners
was not tax OF burden upon commerce
among the States 1 am of the opinion that
the duty of the tax commissioners was to
value the railroad track and the railroad
stock as property, without reference to the
gross earnings of the road or the value of
the franchise of the company, taking into
consideration the aggregate value of the
property of every kind and description in
out of the State.
At the conclusion of the decision Major
Dye moved a rehearing. which was granted.
This, however, does not preclude the col
lection of the taxes