The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1895-01-08
TO TAKE AN APPEAL.
The Supreme Courts Decision
Challenged.
RAILROAD TAXES At ISSUE.
A Motion for a Rehearing Will Be
the First Step.
II THAT FAILS, THEN An APPEAL.
The Basis Of the Railroads Case Is
That a Federal Franchise Has
Been Taxed.
RAILROAD TAXES At ISSUE.
IF THAT FAILS, THEN An APPEAL.

The decision Of the Supreme Court of
the State, rendered Saturday. by which
the tax assessment against the Central
Pacific Railroad for 1887 was declared
lawful. is not likely to be accepted by that
corporation as a final settlement of the
case. In fact, Judging by ex pressions of
officials of the company yesterday, it is al
most certain that future litigation will fol-
low. the first step being an application by
the company for a reheariug. in the event
of the failure of which the case will be
taken 10 the United States Supreme Court.
The basis upon which the railroad rests
its case is that the record shows that the
Federal franchise has been taxed, and
this. the ofncials claim, gives the United
States Supreme Court jurisdiction.
THE matter is not settled by any
means" said one OF the railroad officials,
''but Just what steps will be taken has not
yet fully been determined. But it is GER
tain that tie Judgment of the Supreme
Court, as expressed in Saturdays decision.
will not cause the company to cease its ap-
peals to obtain that which it believes to be
its just dues.
1.-The history of this case presents some
peculiar features, and is about as follows:
In 1887, following the onerous assessments
of 1885 and 1886, the State Board of Equali-
% zaion made the same character of assess
ments. The Central Pacific and Southern
Pacific Railroad companies at that time
had several cases under the tax levy of
1885 in the Supreme Court Of the United
Stats. In the October term of that court
ia 1887 a decision was rendered that the
assessment of 1885 was void because of the
fact that the Federal franchise was in
cluded and valued in said assessment,
and hence the assessment was void, as the
value of Federal franchise could not be
separated from the items sssessable by
salu Board of Equalization, to wit: the
franchise, roadway, roadbed. rails and
roling-stock of the Central Pacific and
Southern Pacific Railroad companies. all
of which were assessed as a unit at a val
uatiOn of $34, 500. 600.
The assessment of 1887 followed in due
course of time, and was held by the above
respective companies to have been made
in the same msnner-with the Federal
franchise included-as was the assessment
of 1885; hence the above companies, hold
ing that the assessment was on all fours
with that of 1885, IL was likewise void.
1.-The AJtorney-Gsneral commenced suit
to recover the taxes in 1887. aud in 1898
the case came on for trial in Judge Heb
bard's court. Among other witnesses was
the chairman of theStateBoard of Equaliza-
tion, L. G. NJ orehouse, who testified that
he knew theFederal franchise was included
in the assessment from the fact that it was
openly discussed 10 the board during the
deliberations In making the assessment,
and be, having doubts in his own mind as
to The policy of assessing it, moved that
each item above mentioned be assessed
separately, so that the entire amount
would not be jeopardized in case decision
was rendered that such franchises were
not taxable.
"The decision was rendered by Judge
Hebbard short time after in favor Of the
State and against the company. and the
case was then appealed to the Supreme
Court. Pending the appeal the reassess-
ment act was passed by the Legislature, it
being known as the Seawell bill. In Sep
TENDER, 1894, the State Board of EQuaiZa-
ton, In regular session. having been ad-
vised that the Hebbard decision was no
bar to any action 1t might desire to take In
the premises, the case then being on APP
peal, reassessed the companies for the
year 1884, the first instalment Of which has
already been paid to the State Treasurer.
TIE animus of the board seems to have
been that in case the Supreme Court de-
clared the assessment Of that year void the
reassessment would act in lieu of Judge
Hebbard's decision, placing the company
10 the position of having no alternative but
to pay these taxes"
There was no manifest disposition on
the part of the Southern Pacific officials TO
discuss the case or the decision as rem
dered by The Supreme Court, but it APP
pears certain, from what was said. that
the case will again 20 before the courts.