Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1901-10-25
IMPORTANT IN ]. N :. Tux Al.X DECISION.
Decision in the Chicago Tax Case is
Important as Affecting Franchise Il
~ -. t3te:t&sJs2 Taxes. ~ 81
Means the Addition of Much Property
- to Tax Rolls that, Has Escaped,
~. ,;2t,': 5sszic Taxation. ys.< j. 4 ~. 80
Action Of the Board of Equalization is
" Condem by Supreme Court Of 'f'
the State.

Springfield, his, oct. zb.-1ne su-
preme court has affirmed the Judgment
of the circuit court Of Sangamon coun-
| ty in what is known ,as the Teachers
| Tax case. This in effect awards a writ
of mandamus against the state board
of equalization to compel it to assess
the capital stock, including franchises.
of 20 Chicago corporations. Two hun
dred and thirty-five million dollars is J
said to be a fairly estimated cash
value of the capital stock, including
franchises, over and above the value
of the tangible property Of those cor
4 porations. .s,:'. I =
This case was instituted by the
states attorney Of Sangamon county
at the instance of the. Chicago, Teach
ers' Federation. It was for a writ of
mandamus to compel the state board
of equalization to assess the foregoing
corporations which, it was alleged
had hitherto escaped taxation by the
board The court holds that the board
in assessing corporations does not act
as board of review, but as an origin
+! al assessor, and that the performance
of it's duty to assess the fair cash
value of capital stock, including fran
! chises. over and above the tangible
property, may be enforced by manda-
mus. Instead of making proper as
! sessment, the court, says, the board
"arbitrarily and wilfully failed to fol
\ low a proper and long established rule
! in force in this state by refusing to
! take into consideration in making
}, such assessments, the
: .>..> Bonded Indebtedness
of said corporations. They also disre
| garded all other rules for the making
: of such assessments in force at the
time of the fling Of this petition an6
/ for the purpose of evading their duty
l sought to pass new rules for their gov
f ernment in making said valuation:
l and assessm ents, and refused to con
l slider the information furnished tt
7 them by the assessors and assessed
), the capital stock and franchises o.
t said corporations at nominal sun
:. instead of at the fair cash value
? thereof. While it is true that fraue
: will not be presumed and that the de
I cision of the state board of equaliza
, tion in fixing the value of corporate
I property for the purpose of taxation
l is quasi-judicial in its nature, still
| when it is apparent to the court thai
!; every well known rule for the valua
! tion of capital stock, including fran
chises, has been violated and arbi
2 trarily disregarded by the board ant
such board has refused to consider the
statements as to values, prepared BY
the assessors under the statute for Its
use, and has refused to consider infor
nation as to the value of such corpor
ate property submitted to it by inter
ested parties and has arbitrarily fixed
: such at a grossly inadequate sum un
: der rules passed by it for the occasion
l the court is justified in holding thai
= fraud in making of such assessments
has been established and such pre-
tended assessments may be properly
disregarded and treated as no assess
: ment and such board be coerced by
the writ of mandamus to assess sucf
!. property"