The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1898-07-22
MEETING OF COMMON COUNCIL.
Solicitor Says the Contemplated
Street Railway Tax is illegal.

Solicitor Says the Contemplated
Street Railway Tax is Illegal.
City Solicitor Mckinley delivered a
Knockout blow last night to the ordi-
nance introduced last May in common
council providing for a tax of 5000 a
mile on street railways. While his
opinion was being read there was so
much noise that 1t was difficult to hear.
1t was read a second time to give
Messrs. Gilroy. Coleman and Grier a
better understanding of its tenor and
effect 1t was as follows:
To the Honorable the Members of the
Common Council OF the City of Scran-
ton.
Gentlemen: AS to the legality of ordi-
nance file of common council No. ~, 1875,
providing for the levy and collection of
license tax on iron and steel rails OF
street railways and other companies in
and upon the streets and highways of
the city of Scranton I would respectfully
submit that said bill would be illegal and
imperative.
All property which is indispensable for
carrying on the business for which a
company is incorporated, and which is
represented by the capital stock of that
corporation, is exempt from local taxa
ton. excepting such property as may pe
specified by statute or within the prov
ince of police regulations.
In the case of the city of Scranton
against the Electric Light and Power
company, where an effort was made on
the part of the city to tax the property
of the light company. Judge Archibald, in
rendering the opinion of the court, stated
the capital of n corporation may be
taxed but not the property covered by It.
~ iS S,,ti al
out public corporate purposes. This finds
familiar examples In the railroad tracks,
depots, machinery, engines, ETC., OF n
railroad company; the canal locks and
gate keepers houses of n canal: the road
bed and gate houses of turnpike; or
the steamers, wharves ana warehouses
of u steamship company.
OPINION QUOTED.
In the case of the Peoples Street Rail-
way company against the city of Scran-
ton. year 1888, being an appeal from the
assessment by the board of revision and
appeals of $4,000 upon the railway tracks
and turntables of the street railway COM
pany, the court said: "The plaintiff is Il
public corporation. Such of it's property,
real and personal, as is necessarily peril
nent to its public works, ndisDensably
necessary to enable the corporation to
fulfill the purposes for which it was char
tered, loses its specific character in
houses, lands etc, so far as the laws
regulating taxes are concerned and is
recognized as simply part of that unity
which is governed by the corporate fran
chise, and taxed directly by the COM
monwealth. The question is not Of eX-
emption from taxation but as to the
manner of taxation. The railway tracks
and turn tables of the plaintiff are. we
think clearly within the rule as above
stated and not liable for assessment for
municipal purposes. The $4,000 assessed
against the plaintiff for this property
should be striken from the assessment.
The proposition of law involved in the
bill being considered by your body has
been passed upon by the lower and appel
late courts very frequently In the past
fifty years See Northampton county VS..
Railway Company, c. c. 4i2: Weimer
on Pennsylvania Corporations $780, Spring
Brook Water Supply company vs. c. II.
Schadt. county treasurer 3 Lackawanna
Legal News 10: Railroad VS.. Berks
county. 6 Pa. 20: l. /. & G. Co. VS.. Lu-
zerne county, ~ Pa. 42i; st. Mary's Gas
CO. VS.. Elk county, 16s Pa. 401; Railroad
vs. Nenango county, 1873 Pa. els.
DECISIONS REVERSED.
Judge Rockefeller in the case of North
cumberland county against the Philadel-
phia and Erie Railroad company. review
ing the decisions concludes that the in
dispensable works of a public corpora
ton are a part of its corporate fran
chises and therefore taxable by the COM
monwealth as stock: that railroad tracks,
laid down and used, are ordinarily and
properly pertinent and are a portion of
the public works of the corporation; that
they are essential for the proper per-
formance and enjoyment of the fran
chises OF the company: for the exercise
ana due execution of it's corporate rights
and privileges, public functions and du-
ties, and are therefore exempt from taX-
alton for local purposes.
The city solicitor communicated also
the fact that the viewers appointed to
assess the benefits and damages of
Section c of the Fifth sewer district
mas estimated the cost of the sewer at
$9,35O, of which sum S7,4S0 is assessed
to abutting property owners, and ST.
$40 to the city. If no exceptions are
filed the report will be confirmed final
ly in thirty days.
third communication was received
from Mr. Mckinley asking for instruc-
tions whether or not to appeal to the
supreme court from the peremptory
mandamus directed by Judge Edwards
to City Controller Robinson to certify
the contract for the South Side sewer.
The communication was ordered filed.
DAMAGES AWARDED.
The ordinance awarding $3.50 to
Thomas b. Jackson for his property on
Monsey avenue. which was damaged
by the sewer overflow, passed third and
final reading. The bids for the con-
struction of the pave on North Main
avenue were received and referred to
committee without being read.
Ordinances on first and second read
ing were: Providing for a fiagstone
sidewalk and gutter on Prospect ave-
nue. between River and Beech streets;
an ordinance providing for the con-
struction of a sewer on Wheeler ave-
nue. from Vine street to a point 40
feet north of Gibson; an ordinance pro-
viding for nagstone.