Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1897-09-05
OPINION BY-BELKHAP, G. !.

This is the second appeal in this case.
(46 Pac. 723D
Appellant mad" the statutory state
ment to the Assessor fixing the value of
its main and side track in W sloe County
at Sl3l 500. Notwithstanding this it was
assessed at Ss54 200.
The answer alleged that the assessment
was ont of proportion to and above the
actual cash value of the property. in com
pliance with the statute permitting this
defense. l>5tats. 1875. p. l}9l
The jury found lhc value to be $2l22OO.
This is exclusive Of rolling stock and
other property valued at Si993O, concern
ing which there was no controversy.
Judgment was entered upon the verdict
together with penalties, and from the
Judgment and an order denying a motion
for new trial an appeal has been taken.
The record of III" former trial Goes not
show that any point was made touching
the time of the commencement of the tis-
cal yPar-Whether in July or January.
1t seems to have been assumed upon that
trial that it commenced upon the first
day "f July for the purpose of taxation
of railroads. The District Court in
>trurtv4 til" jury that the fiscal year for
the purpose Of taxation commenced upon
January lst and there does not appear to
be any serious contention concerning The
correctness Of the instruction.
[ pom Tia" former appeal it was decided
that the yalUe of the railroad for the pur-
poses Of taxation should I've determined
mainly by its net earnings capitalized at
IN" c::rtent rate of interest. In that cas-"
1t WAS sh Wn without contradiction that
the current rate of interest was eight per
cent per annum. In this, it was shown
that the rate for loans WAS not lower than
eight per cent, but for investments the
rate was six per cent. Money or capital
laid out in a permanent form as in the
construction of a railroad the jury may
have concluded was in the nature of an
investment and not Of a temporary loan
and the rate of interest should he the
same as investments command. There
was evidence to support either view of
| the case and as all intendmrnts must hc
taken in support of the verdict in the ah~
scncC Of an express finding 10 the CON
| trary, we conclude that the Jury found
| the rate of interest 10 be six per cent Per
annum.
/ Appellant claims that it's not income as
! shown by its books WAS not greater than
S29,03S.5S. Respondent in support of the
| judgment claims that items omitted bv
| appellant should he Included in its in
| come and that Il greater income should be
taken as the basis of capitalization.
1t will only be necessary to consider
one of these matters.
a reduction of the pay of the officers
and employees of the Company was et-
| fected in the month of MAY. 1896. bv which
the operating expenses of the road were
reduced at the rate of s3,S39 per annum
1t was shown without contradiction that
| appellant did not necessarily require
| more officers and employees in the yeAI
lS93 than it did in the year 1896. Under
| this showing it was competent for the
jury to have found that the operating eX-
| penses of the year 1895 could have been
| by economical management reduced tC
the rate thai had been subsequently es-
tablished i'll 1896. The instruction given
to the jury 10y the court upon its own mo-
ton upon this subject appears to he en-
trely unohjectionablc. 1t is as follows
YOU are instructed that the net income
of a ra;l'~'d company when necessary tC
be deter.....'f r." purposes Of taxation
is the diitercnu. belween the gross re
ceipts and necessary expenses n / rea
sonably economical and pr',,.ent manage
ment. By reasonably economical anC
prudent management is meant manage
ment conducted with that care, diligence
and attention which an ordinarily prn
dent and careful person, qualified to per
form such, would take and exercise if th
property so managed was his own.
In any particular case, the gross re
ctipts to be considered for said purpose
| ur:lx bn nIrrtS ln