Kansas City journal. [volume] (Kansas City, Mo.) 1897-1928, 1899-10-08
NOT UNIFORM NOR EQUITABLE
1T SOUGHT TO DRIVE OUT UNLICENS-
ED INSURANCE COMPANIES.
Paving Contract With Five Years
maintenance Clause Declared to
BE SnIiG-Santa Fe Wins
Its Fine Tax
Case.

TOPEKA. Oct ..-tSDeCiait The Zinl-
mer law. imposing tan u 10 per cent on
The premiums o! all Insurance contracts
written on Kansas property by companies
not authorized to do business IL the state,
was declared unconstitutional by the su-
preme court to-day. The decision was rem
dcred in the habeas corpus proceedings
brought by Thomas Page, the Topeka mill
cr.
The object of the Law was to compel all
insurance companies 20 take out a license
business death as long as they refused
to come in. In order to make it possible
To collect the lax, the law provided that
the person taking out the policy in an
authorized company should pay the tax.
| Thomas Page, the Topeka miller. took out
Il policy on his mill with the Indiana Mill
erS Mutual Fire insurance Company, an
unauthorized concern. Insurance Supc-in-
tcndent Church made a demand on him to
exhibit his policy and to pay the 10 per
cent tax. He refused to do either. He vas
arrested and, in order to test the case. did
not give bond for his appearance. but ap-
Piled to the supreme court for release on
IA writ of habcas corpus.
! The supreme court, In passing upon the
case to-day. said: The act in part author
| zes the imposition of a tax for other than
public purposes. IL is also distinct de-
parturc from the constitutional rule of uni
| form!ty and equality. and is invalid. The
| burden imposed is not 4 license, nor a
charge placed upon a privilege, franchise
| or occupation. II is specifically designated
as Il tax, and levied upon insurance con-
| tracts, which are treated as taxable as
sets. The ac. is an anomaly in the method
/ of IL
| a wide departure from the means OF taxa
tion heretofore employed in this state. y
tax is ordinarily levied on property, income
or receipts of the taxpayer and not upon
| what IS paid out. This is the pioneer ef-
| fort to tax losses and disbursements in
stead Cf profits and Accommodations. 1t is
the only recorded instance of requiring a
man to pay 3 tax not upon what he hath
or scemeth To have, but confessedly upon
what he hath not. Without assessment
or valuation of property. the legislature I
tempts to make an arbitrary exaction. Con-
tracts written outside of the state cannot
be regarded as Illegal. The law is in
valid
Nels Hanson. of Kansas City, Kas.,
brought suit in the common pleas court oi
Wyandotte county to enjoin the collection
of taxes for paving a street in front of his
property. The ground on which the actor
was based was that the contract made b.
the city council bound the contractor &c
keep the pavement in repair for five years
that this provision meant that the con
tractor had included in his bid the cost oi
repairs, which must be borne by the city
at large Il was. therefore. cOntended tina
| the whole contract was illegal and tina
the taxes for the improvement were un
ColicCti ibIe The common pleas court de
cidel in favor of Hanson and the court o
| appeals affirmed the decision. The supreme
court to-day reversed both. claiming tha
the contract to repair was simply guar
anty of the quality of material and work
manship. The lower court was INSTRUCTED
TO enter judgment according to this opin
ion.
The Santa Fe company has won its ilr'
tax suit against Edwards county. Las
year Edwards county levied a fire tax o
. mills The Santa Fe filed suit to en-
join the collection of the tax on th'
ground that the tax was not uniform, an'
that railroads are excluded from the ben
eiits of such tax. The district court grant
, ed permanent injunction. The court o
appeals reversed the decision and to-da!
the supreme court reversed the court OF ap
peals and affirmed the decision of the dis
trict court.
The court upheld the Sedrcn ana Se!Lui'
ordinance passed by the Topeka city coun
Gil few months ago. After its passag
| Frank Raynor's joint was raided by TN
police and his stock and fixtures were con
tiscated by order of the court. He ap
pealed to the supreme court to test IN
!. ordinance He claimed that the o-dinanc
l was in conflict with section of the bill q
: rights, which declares that all men ar
q possessed of equal and inalienable rights
among which are life, liberty and the pur
suit of happiness" The court held tha
/ the provision quoted did not cover Ray
; ncrs case and dismissed the appeal.
Other decisions handed down follow:
, BY Chief Justice Doster-Atchison. To
. peka Il Santa Fe Railroad Company "
n George W. Wiley: error from Sumne
| county: reversed.
BY Justice Johnston-Atchison. Topeka
. Santa Fe Railway Company vs. John Pot
ter. as next friend to George Potter,
minor: error from Pawnee county; re
| versed. State of Kansas vs. John {. WI
| liams: appeal from Saline county: affirmed
BY Justice Smith-lnvestment Securitie
9 Company vs. Henry BergthOld ct al; erro
t from Marion county; affirmed. In re H
. | Farmhouse ct al: original proceedings
!. habeas corpus: petitioners discharged:
n Per curiam-James L. Hughes VS.. r.
, Kepley et al: error from Shawnee county
q affirmed. Atchison. Topeka & Santa F
= al: error from court Of appeals. Souther
:. division: affirmed State of Kansas "
- Peter Eammerli: appeal from Cloud cOu!
II ty: affirmed The city of Hoiton VS.. JOh
! Bimrod: error from cour; of appeal!
:; Northern division: dismissed. The city
~ of appeals, Northern division: dismisset
n The state of Kansas vs. L. E. johnson
error from the court of appeals: dismissed
= w H. Brown ct al W. Louise G. H. Pi