The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1900-01-24

OF the public sch0Olsl
Why should they object to "a rule fol
taxation that has received the emphatic
sanction Of the highest judicial tr.b u-
nal In the land. ana which has been pro.
nounced by Il TO be the fairest and mos
equitable method that could be devised
In well considered opinion OF great inn
portance. the supreme court Of the United
states spoke as follows.
When you have ascertained the cur
rent cash value of the whole funded debt
4 and the current cash value OF the entir.
number OF shares. you have by the action
\ OF those who. above all others. can best
estimate IL. ascertained the true value OF
the road, OF its property, it's capital stock
/ and its franchise; for these are all rep
resented by the value OF Its bonded debt
and OF the shares Of It's capital stock. .
! And further, 1T may be well doubted
/ whether or not better method OF deter
mining that portion OF the track within any
one county has been devised than to hscer-
! tain the value Of the whole road, aud APP
! portion the value within the county b.
It's relative length to the whole" And IN
another case, In which the method OF tax
ing express companies By the state OF Ohio
was directly involved, the same court de-
ciared IL TO be "a cardinal rule which
should never be forgotten that whatever
property is worth for the purpose OF in
come and sale, IL Is also worth for the
purposes Of taxation" and that Substance
OF right demands that whatever be the real
value of any property, that value may be
accepted by the State for the purposes OF
taxation, and this ought not to be eyaded
by any mere confusion OF Words" and
further, TO the owners thereof, for the
purposes OF income and sale the uorpor.
ate property is worth hundreds of thous-
ands OF dollars. Does substance OF right
Require that 1t shall pay taxes only upon
the thousands OF dollars of tangible prop
erty which IL possesses? Accumulated
wealth Will laugh at the orudity OF tax
Ing laws which reach the one and ignore
I the other, while they who own tangible
property, not organized into a single pro-
duolng plant, feel the injustice of sys-
TEN which so misplaces the burden OF tax
alton" The court that delivered these
and like utterances In the support of a
Just equitable and effective system Of tax
alton. has long been regarded as harbor
OF refuge by organized capital, to which
IL has always He'd in order to avoid II
possible, the just requirements OF state
laws and the adverse decisions OF stae
courts
The tax commission, in preparation Of
the accompanying blll has, therefore. been
very careful to follow its opinions in the
provisions for the taxation Of railways
express companies and other corporate u-
stitutons Should there be any doubt as
TO the policy or constiutionallty OF such
provisions Il Is earnestly recommended
that most thorough consideration OF the
eases cited in the report OF the cummiss ion
DO given before final action.
am further advised by the railroad
commission that the net prohts arising
from The operation OF $500 miles. con-
ssting Of main lines branches and spurs
and l0zS.I9 miles Of yard tracks and sid
lngs' during the year ending June 80 1898
after deduotlng $50, 293. 1916 for every
expense OF administration, amounted to
$40 sos SS79S-that the number OF miles
valued by tie commission was 1884. So
exclusive OF yard tracks and sidings-and
that the rate per centum Of net earnings
upon the roads SO valued was for that
year 2,SS per cent on the total amount
of stock and bonds. 7,4S per cent on the
commission valuation OF physical prop
critics; and ld,ii per cent on their value
as assessed for taxation
Here the contrast may be pertinently
drawn between the taxation upon rail
ways in This and other States.
IN the report OF the railroad commission
We find the total taxation for lSHg.--in-
GLIDING counties. cities and town--upon
every character OF property in this state
owned and used for railway purposea by
the companies, to be 1880. 202.2s
The corporations paying this tax held
ard operated s2Sa.5i miles OF first or mali
track-other tracks not being listed From
the tax stated should be deducted that due
on 100 miles OF railroad in the Indian Ter
ritory ana belonging 10 the Gulf, Colorado
and Santa Fe railway company, aud 3iS9 rs
miles in Louisiana and belonging to the
Texas and Pacific Rallay company, as no
part of the tax upon these particular prom
critics has ever been paid to the State or
TO any of its subdivisions. This extra
territorial tax and mileage however, Is
embraced In the two amounts first given,
respectively.
The International and Great Northern
railway 1850 miles-is not included be-
ing uon-taxable. With this explanation 1t
may be said as unquestlonably true, that
tho entire cost of taXation--StatG, county
and munlcipal-upon every character of
property IN this State belonging TO the
railways and by them used for railway
purposes did not. in 1898. average the rate
OF 500 for every mile of first or main
trackage-the total tax for the support
of the State government and the public
schools being SSi97 per mile, as shown
by the comptrollers report for that year
During the same period Maine collected
through taxation Sl7e,952.S on l74s95
miles OF railway, or sl02,0S per mile; Mas
sachusetts on 1885, 81 total miles OF FIRST
second third and fourth tracks. exclusive
OF local taxes. 81, 1898, eS633, or 1921. 20 per
mile Connecticut on l00S.25 miles Ssi0-
1880. or Ss02.69 per mile New Hamp-
shire on 1lI2 miles. exclusive OF local
taxes. SlS5, 6l94O, Or S11S.15 per mile; Ohio
on i3,OSS.65 total miles OF FIRST second.
third and fourth tracks, yard tracks and
sidings, S9,6li1s7,O5 or S200.5G per mile.
Illinois on i0,6i6.s0 miles $4,I5s. 44s 81 or
S4i105 per mile; Indiana on 629e.96 miles
Of main track. 30i miles OF second track
and 2oS6S7 miles of sdetrack. making a
total mileage of S,6Ss.sS miles an assess
ment of Sl5S, 69Sh06. or $l76.9S per mile
the average tax rate being $3.50 on each
$500 dollars; and New Jersey under an
assessment on 2s7S.526 miles OF arst track.
Sa7al miles OF second track, la635S miles
Of third and fourth tracks, and 145O.29J
miles Of sidings-aggregat 4flS.l04
mlles--Sl SIP 6So.4S or sSiS.5S per mile
/ for State and local purposes
The difference In the method OF assess
/ ing this character OF property In Texas
and In the States mentioned should MOI
( be overlooked. Here only the main or first
track is listed there all kinds Of TRACES
are valued and counted in the mileage.
/ To Illustrate the great inequality OF as
assessment by the railway companies the
railroad commission, in its able and vail
liable report for the year 1895. submits the
following tabe and observations: