The Newberry herald and news. (Newberry, S.C.) 1884-1903, 1894-03-21
A VICTORY FOR THE STATE
The Tax Case Decided Against the Rail-
roads.-Judge Simoneon Crders-the
Roads to Pay up the Unpaid
Ealance-ef their Taxes.


Roads to Pay up the Unpaid
Bslance-ef their Taxes.
News and Courier, 14th.l
Judge Simonton yesterday filed a
decision in the much-litigated railroad
tax cases. The title of the case was
D. 81. Chamberlain, receiver of the
South Carolina Railway Company, VS.
Geo. H. Walter, Hugh Ferguson ct al,
The issues are involved clearly ex
planned in the edecis;on, OF which the fol-
lowing is the text:
THE DECREE.
This bill is brought by the receiver
of the South Carolina Railway Com
pany against certain county treasurers
and sherits Of the State of South Caro-
lins, seeking instructions respecting
the assessment and levy of a tax upon
the railway property in his hands.
This proceeding is ancillary to the case
off. w. Round VS. South Carolina
Railway Company in which the
complainant herein was appointed re-
.ceiver. Davis VS., Gary IS Wallace,
2l9.)
After setting out the sections of the
General Statutes of South Carolina
prescribing the mode of making re-
turns of railroad property for taxation
and then averring that he had made
his return for the tax Of 1891, fully
conforming in all respects with the
requirements of the law, the bill goes
on to say that all real property in
South Carolina assessed for taxation
has been heretofore and is low openly
and notoriously assessed for taxation
at uniform rate of SO or 60 per cent of
its actual face value, and that personal
property is assessed at the same rate or
less. That he made the return of the
property under his charge at the ac-
cHstomed valuation Heretofore placed
upon it at from so 70 IS per cent Of the
same, which was fully equal to and in
reality higher than the relative value
of other property in the State. That
this returu having been fled with the
Comptroller General. and having be cn
submitted by that officer to the State
board ol equalization for railroads, tina t
board considered the same and raised
the assessment from $4,000 per miles
as made by compiaipant, to $4,000 per
mile, and in the case of the Carolina,
Cumberland Gap and Chicago Railway
property, leased by and so returned by
complaint, raised it from 5000 tc
$4,000 per mile. At the same time the
same board raised the assessments OF
ali the other railroad property in this
State greatly above the returns made
by them respectively. The bill then
charges that this board Of equalization
for railroads made this increase in the
assessment of railroad property, well
knowing that the valuation fixed in,
their returns was fully equal to and
the same as the average and uniform
valuation of similar real and personal
property Ia this State by other boards.
That nmakiagt their valuation county
and county boards OF assess-
auent throughout the State had con-
Cured in establishing rate of valus-
ton about so or 60 per cent Of the
actual value, and that this board OF
equalization for railroads assessed the
property at a value fully equal to or
greater than its actual value, with the
intent thereby to cast great proper
ton Of the burden of taxation on the
railroads and to shield and protect
from their Just share of taxation other
classes Of property-holders. That the
Constitution Of South Carolina provides
that all property subject to taxation
shall be taxed in proportion to its
value, and directs the General Assem-
bly, to provide by law for q uniform
and equal rate of assessment and taxa
ton, and to prescribe such regulations
as shall secure just valuation for
taxation of all property, real. personal
and possessory.
The bill charges that this board Of
equalization for the railroads has
violated this part of the Constitution;
that by It's action the property of all
railroads in the State has been denied
by the State the equal profession OF its
laws; and that this railroad property
has been assessed and taxed unequally
and uDjustly in violation Of the 10Th
amendment to the Constitution of the
United States.
The bill also charges that whilst
under the Constitution of this State
lands and the Improvement thereon
are assessed for taxes every fifth year,
the property of railroad companies,
consisting fargsly of land and improve
ments thereon, is assessed forzSaxation
annually, in this respect ha;fug treated
as personal property. But that for the
purpose Of lien and collection Of taxes
the Acts of Assembly deal with it as
real estate. That this action on the
part of this board is unconstitutional,
null and void, depriving railroad COM
panIss of their property without due
process of law and denying to them
equal protection of the laws.
The bill also charges that the act OF
the board in raising the assessment is
in itself null and void the assessmnt is
illegal, because this is not within the
powers Of the board.
It is averred that the comlaioant has
paid the amount of tax lawfully and
Justly due on proper assessment. The
answer denies that the return made by
complainant is true and correct in
valuation of the property thereon. 1t
denies that the sum paid is the amount
of taxes really and justly due. 1t AYERS
that complainant has plain, adequate
and complete remedy at law.
Itis we'll at the threshold to define
the limit of the power of this Court
over the subject matter Of this suit. 1t
cannot review the assessment made by
the State officials simply upon the
gound that it is excessive. (Stariing VS.
Supervisors, 121 U. S., 519,) Nor can
it make new assessment or direct
another, to be made. Estate Railroad
Tax cases, 80 .. S., 615.l Nor can it
interfere upon the ground that the tax
is illegal. (Willisms VS. Albany Co.,
122 q. S., 154; Legion VS. Alley, l30 ..
s., 177.) Nor can it interfere because |
have adopted a different system. Nv.
.. Tel Co., VS. Massachusetts,, rs .. S., |
553; Davenport National Bank VS.
Supervisors, 123 .. S., 49, $50 long
~ q State by IFS laws nrcscribinp the !