The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1900-12-21
RAILROADS TWILL RESIST
The Hearing II Raleigh Will Last
Through Saturday.
WITNESSES FROM THREE COUNTIES HERE
Johnston Witnesses Were Examined Yesterday
and il is Likely That the Durham Wit
Eesses Will be Put on the
Stand Today.


progresses slowly.
When it began the State declared
that it could finish with its witnesses
here in two days. Three days have
already been consumed, however, and
at least two more will be required
Witnesses from the three counties
are being examined here-Wake, John
ston and Durham. Twenty-three wit
nesses from Wake have been on the
stand, with quite number still to be
examined. -Four Johnston county
witnesses have testified, with two or
three others to be examined this morn
ing. The Durham witnesses will prob
ably be here today.
From here the court will go to Viii
mington, beginning there on Thurs
day, December 9th. At the hearing
in that city, it is expected that the
question of the differentiation of rail-
road property in North Carolina will
be fully gone into.
That this will be resisted by the
railroads was stated at the hearing
here Wednesday, when their attorneys
declared that they would go even to
the extent of asking Judge Simonton
to strike out the part of the Corpora
ton Commissions answer raising the
question. At yesterday mornings hear
ing they repeated this statement when
the matter came up, Capt, Price say
ing: Z
ION yesterday it was suggested that
in SO far as the evidence taken in this
case was applied to the second case
it should be used in that case. But
when it was suggested here yesterday
that you would near evidence of the
valuation of the railroads, | suggested
that as the pleadings were different
in the two cases and not in conformity
one to the other, it was my purpose
to move to strike out that part of the
answer in the second case that is not
in conformity with the answer in the
first case. The only difference be-
tween us was as to the time expected
for motion to strike out. [ want it
understood that we are not 10 be pre-
Judged by reason of the fact that we
did not do it in a set time"
Judge Connor: 1.-The statement was
made last night that that motion
would not be made in ten or fifteen
days"
Capt. Price: Certainly not Moth
ing will be done save at your conven-
ience."
And thus the matter now stands.
At Yesterdays session exactly
bakers dozen of witnesses were exam
med. Nine of them were from Wake
county and four from Johnston.
The nine Wake county witnesses
were as follows:
CASTOR Jones, assessor for Raleigh
township.
J. T. Edwards. assessor for Buckhorn
township.
Il. p Stewart. assessor for Middle
Creek township.
b. x. Partin, assessor for Middle Creek
township.
j. d. Johnston, assessor for st. Marys
township.
Parker Rand, assessor for ST. Marys
township.
w. z. Pool. tax payer in st. Marys
township.
II. c. Massey. tax payer in st. Marys
township.
D. T. Johnson. assessor in Raleigh
township and member of the board of
equalization.
The four witnesses from Johnston
county were all examined at the after
noon session of the court and were:
II. j. !
the Legislature and formerly an assessor
j. T. Ellington, sheriff and at one time
an assessor.
lst-taker.
John A. Maroon, county attorney and
once an assessor.
The evidence of these witnesses did
not materially differ from that given
Il hn "a CT ON
Wednesday.
Each assessor swore positively that
he tried to put the true cash value on
the property he assessed; that each lot
or tract was passed ON separately, and
the conclusion arrived at was always
believed by the assessor to be its fair
cash value.
The taxpayers examined said that
they had always considered that in
listing their property they were bound
by the true-cash-value rule and had
never heard of any rule to uniformly
or designedly undervalue property.
Those questioned about sales made
since the 1899 assessment had known
some made at figures above the assess
ed valuation and some below it, but
nearly everyone of them had been on
time and not for cash. Sales on an
average, they thought, were for about
the tax valuation of the property.
Most of the witnesses were put
through tedious and often veXing
denominations. but they always
ended up where they began and no
material variation was ever shown
from their direct testimony.
Mr. Holt had always understood the
tax value of property to be what it would
bring in cash at the time the assessment
was made. He was once assessor and this
was the rule he followed he had never
heard of any other rule.
When the 1899 assessment was made |
land was lower in price than now
What per cent do you thing the farms
OF Johnston pay their owners?"
Il don't think they average over 5 /.