The Yale expositor. (Yale, St. Clair County, Mich.) 1894-current, 1900-12-21

In your regular session, by enacting
the Atkinson law, you decided that rail-
road and certain other corporate proper
ty should be assessed at Its actual cash
value. The people. at the recent general
election. made II clear, beyond dispute.
that you were right and acting accord
ing to their wishes in doing so. 1t must
be admitted, therefore, that the princi-
pie being settled, the method OF deter
mining the actual cash value of railroad
property is not one for the legislature TO
fix 1t does not attempt to lay down
rules FOR the guidance of assessors anc
supervisors in valuing other kinds or
property. and there is ne reason why u
should do so in tho case Of a state board
of assessors of railroad property. 1t Is
therefore, not proper subject for dis
cussion. either IN executive message or
in legislative debate.
To the argument of the railroad at
torney that the average rate of taxes
in the state if applied to the assess
ment of railroad property, would not re-
suit in equal taxation, but in unequal
taxation. wouia reply that the reas-
oning Of the attorney while ingenious
is entirely misleading and unfair. A rail-
road extends through n number Of coun-
ties, and consequently its properly lies
in large number OF assessing districts.
1t Is valuable because 1t operates over a
large extent of territory. In other words,
1t Is valuable whole. and II must be
appraised and assessed and taxed
sa the en tnyaas S d0 nUt e Soss
relish hSving their property as
sessed liz small parcels, according
to the assessing districts. and the rate OF
| taxation of each district anplied to the
| property located N IL. IN fact, railroad
| officials have said to me that they prefer
| assessment by state board, rather tnan
| by local assessing districts. II, because
of the peculiar character and location
| of the property of those corpora tons. 1t
| Is best to assess them as a whole, by a
! state board what rate. other than the
average rate, would be just ana eqult-
able? The railroad advocates claim thal
! the proposed plan of taxing their proper
| ty upon it's cash value is wrong, bat that
! question the people have already settled,
and it rests with you merely 10 enact q
| law, which shall be as nearly just 10
railroad and all other property owners
| as it is in your power to frame IT.
The expert appraisers employed by the
state tax commission, under your direc-
ton and authority, to value the property
| of railroads and other corporations now
| paving specific taxes, have not hhsheo
| their work, but 1 am able to submit 70
| tangible property of thirty railroads. the
| following table gives: % The name or the
| railroad; (2) the present Vaiue OF lts
physical property, determined oy . proi
! under the present law, upon the earn
ings for 1899. which were payable on July
| l. 1900; (D the amount OF taxes Whlch tht
TO the value of it's tangible property
without including the franchise value, AT
the average rate of all taxes In the STATE
as computed officially by the state "a :
| commission. according to the rule la
down in the constitution, as amended al
the recent general election; and hnaliy
| "a the increased taxes which Inc ran
| rood would pay If assessed at cash value
exclusive of franchise value. and taxed
according to the average rate above men
| toned: $500
| harrison between railroads, with their