The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1900-04-14

ey, creates a discrimination which is un-
lawful. If this alleged rule existed in
resolution of the various boards of as
SCISSORS, or in any compact between them,
oral CT written, or in any statutory en-
actment the proper mode of proving it
would be by evidence directly showing
the existence of such rule. If, however,
the existence of the rule cannot be shown
in this way, but is matter of inference
from a uniform course of conduct, then
the only mode of proof is by showing a
sufficient number of instances from which
such course of conduct could be in
ferred
In the one case the conclusion would
be reached priori, in the other poste-
ricre. In the one case we would go from
the general to the particular. In the
other from particulars to the general. If
therefore the compliments cannot estab-
lsh the existence of the rule except by
inference il is lawful for them to intro
duce evidence as to the particular in
stances from which they seek to establish
the general rule.
During the examination the defendants
prcpounded questions tending to show the
value of the property OF the road bed
and other property CT the corporations
complainant, complaining of the action
OF the Corporation Commission. Com
plainants object to this line of examina
ton en- the ground that the matter is not
in this issue.
The Constitution of the State Of North
Carolina, and the Acts of Assembly
passed under authority thereof requires
all real and personal property in the
State to be assessed for taxation at it's
actual value in money
The Corporation Commission which is
entrusted with the assessment of railroad
property for taxation assessed the prop
erty OF the several compliments at a
certain sum each The compliments
thereupon come into this court, alleging
that the method adopted with regard to
them differs materially from the method
adopted with regard to all other real and
personal property in the State, so that
they are exposed to unjust discrimination.
On that allegation they ask an injunc-
ton. On the truth of that allegation de-
ponds the action of this court.
1T cannot assess the value of property
nor perform any of the functions OF the
assessor. 1t cahnot pass upon the assess
ment and say whether or not it be excess
sive or whether it be illegal, rregularly
imposed or unjust. r. r. Tax cases, 92
7. S. $50. There must be some ground
for the interference of court Of equity
And it's interference cannot go to the re-
assessment of the property, but to the
removal of the unlawful action.
In the present case we must assume
that the corporation did it's duty and full
filled the constitutional and statutory re-
quirement of assessing the railroad prop
erty. The amount of the assessment this
court cannot question. The sole ques-
tiCn is, does there exist in North Caro-
lima a rule or practice universal enough
to presume the existence Of a rule where
by all real and personal property other
than railroad property is assessed below
it's value for taxation.
THE burden of showing this is on
compliments. Until this burden is re-
moved the inquiry must be directed to it,
II it be removed then it may possibly be
competent for the defendants to show
that if such a rule or practice does ex-
list. it is applied also to the railroad COM
panies and as to them there is no dis
elimination
The Standing Master will conduct the
examination in accordance with these rul-
ingS.