The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1899-09-10
RAILROADS MUST
PROVE FRAUD
Continued From First Page.)


of an intention ON the part of the Board
of Equalization to violate the constitu-
tional provision in relation to equality
of taxation, and a design to put the
burden of tax alone on railroads, as
would warrant the interference of the
court
The suit was brought by ID. f.. Cham
berlain, receiver of the South Carolina
Railway Company, against George ii.
Walter, Hugh Ferguson and others,
sheriffs and county treasurers of the
State of South Carolina, seeking the
instructions of the court in respect to
the assessment and levy of a tax on the
property of the railway company.
THE FACTS IN THE CASE.
The complaint in the case reads won
derfully like that in the present injunc-
ton cases. After setting out the general
statutes of South Carolina prescribing
the mode of making returns of railroad
property for taxation, and then averring
that he had made his return for the
tax, 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 now, openly
and VIGOROUSLY assessed for taxation at
a uniform rate of so or go per cent of
it's 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-
customed valuation heretofore placed
upon it AIT from 60 to 65 per cent of
the same, which was fully equal to, and
=, h ;nbnr han fba
of other property in the State; that this
return having been filed with the Comp
fro.ler General. and having been submit
ted by that officer to the State board of
equalization for railroads. that board
considered the same, and raised the as
sessmert from $4,000 per mile, as made
by the complainant, to $4,000, and in
the case of the Carolina, Cumberland
Gap and Chicago Railway property,
leased by and so returned by complain
ant. raised it from $1,000 to $4,000 per
mile. At the same time the same board
raised the assessment of all the other
railroad property in this State greatly
above the returns made by them, re-
spectively.
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 uni
form valuation of similar real and per-
sonal property in this State by other
boards; that in making their valuation,
county auditors and county boards OF
assessment throughout the State had
concurred in establishing a rate of val
uation about 80 or 60 per cent of the
actual value and that this board OF
equalization for railroads assessed the
property at value fully equal to, or
greater than its actual value, with the
intent thereby to cast "a 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 i'm proportion to its value, and dl-
reefs the general assembly to provide
by law for uniform and equal rate
of assessment and taxation, and TO pre-
scribe such regulations as shall secure
a Just valuation for taxation OF all
property-rea, personal and possessory.
The bill charges that this board or
CONSULTATION for railroads has Violated
this part of the constitution; That by Is
action the property of all railroads IN the
State has been denied by the State the
equal protection of its laws; and that
this railroad property has been assessed
and taxed unequally and unJustly, III
violation of the Fourteenth Amendment
TO the Constitution of the United States.
1T is well. at the Threshold, says
Judge Simonton, III his opinion, after
reviewing these facts, ITO dehne the
limit of the power of this court over
the subject matter of this suit.
WHEN AN INJUNCTION LIES.
lit cannot review the assessment
made by the State officials simply upon
the ground that it is excessive.
Nor can it make a new assessment,
or direct another to be made.
Nor can it interfere upon the ground
that the tax is illegal
Nor can it interfere because the
court would prefer, and would have
adopted, a different system.
$50 long as State, by its laws pre-
scribing the mode and subjects of tax
alton. does not intrench upon the legi-
innate authority of the Union, or violate
any right recognized or secured by the
Constitution of the United States, this
court, as between the State and its
citizen can afford him no relief against
State taxation, however, unjust, oppres-
siye or onerous ii may be.
But when the generalization of prop
erty assessed for taxation has arisen
from the adoption Of a rule of appraise-
ment which conflicts with a constitution
al or statutory direction, and operates
unequally, not merely on a single IN
diyidual, but on a large class OF indi-
yiduals or corporations, the courts can
give redress to the party agglieyed there
by.
1--WE see that there is an essential
ingredient: Those whose duty Is TO
make the assessment must adopt rule
or system of valuation with the design
that it shall operate unequally, and ylo-
late some fundamental principle of the
constitution.
THE RULE OF TAXATION
What is the rule or system of taxa
ton adopted by the board of equalization
for railroads? The general assembly OF
South Carolina are instructed by the
constitution IN Irescrihe such regulations