The age-herald., 1901-04-12
Supreme Court Renders Very
 Important Decision
CONCERNS ALL RAILROADS
Property of Railroad Companies Ex. cept Tracks, Sidetracks and Roll ing Stock Is liable to Taxa
 ton by the Counties.

Montgomery, April 1.-(Special. 1.-The Alabama Supreme Court today rendered decision holding that the property of rail- roads, except right of way roadbed, side tracks and main tracks, together with the locomotives and cars. and supplies carried on trains for sale to employees, Is justly to be assessed for taxes by the various county tax assessors. in counties which such other property may be situ- ated.
 This case came to the court from Limestone County, where the lower court sustained an action by the county board of assessment in holding valid an act of the assessor returning certain depot and other property for assessment. The Supreme Court In decision by MT. Jus tice Tyson, today, sustained the lower court. The court says;
 The Decision.
 ."The franchises, right of way, roadbed and tracks of a railroad together with the rolling stock by which it is operated. are practically and substantially one property, though it's lines may extend through several counties and states. The injustice and inequality resulting from the assessment of such property in parcels by different officials and the unequal dis tribution of the proceeds of taxation, based on values thus assessed to the sew eral jurisdictions which afford protection to the property, are evils which our legts- lation has constantly sought to avoid.
 Since the act of 1868 our statutes for the purpose of taxation have treated certain items of property of a railroad as a unit, or one piece of property, to be assessed by single board, and has dis- tributed the proportion of county taxes derived among the several counties in which the railroad is situated In the pro- portion the number of miles in that county bears to the total length of the road, while other items of taxable prop erty of railroads have been treated as local property. to be assessed by the officials of the county where 1t is situ- ate and which derived the entire benefit of taxes thereon without any reference to the value of the other property of the railroad in other counties. In other words. for the purposes of taxation certain prop erty has been delocalized and treated as pertaining equally to the whole line, and therefore to be assessed by single board, distributing the taxes thus de- rived in the manner we have stated above while other property has been  by local officers, wherever the property Is situated, so that the county in which 1t Is assessed may have the benefit of It's full taxable value.
 What these several items are, wnlcp are thus classified for the purpose of different sassessnsnt and distribution, are carefully selected and defined by our stat,Ite-Code. Sec. 3964-3g76. In determin- ing what shall be classed as local and what is to be considered as pertaining to the whole line, the Legislature has not always been governed by the necessity TOT the use of the things so selected In the operation of railroad water supplies and tanks are certainly as indispensable parts of the roads as sidetracks yet, as we shall presently see. one is specifically mentioned as an item of property per- taining to the whole road, while the other Is treated as local and accessible by the local authorities"
 The court further says: During this long period the high executive officers of the State. who constitute the State Board of Assessment, charged with the assessment of the property of railroads, have uniformly held that such board Of assessment had no jurisdiction to assess any property of railroads, except right Of way. road-bed, side tracks and main tracks, together with the locomotives and cars, and supplies carried in trains for sale to employees: and that structures of all kinds on the right of way, were prop erty assessable by the assessors of the county in which such property Is found. This construction of the statute, If the matter were one of doubt, is persuasive to the conslusion, at least, against, if not fatal to the contention of the appellant.
 The court does not rest its opinion here, however but holds that since the State Board of Assessment is Q creature of the statute it has no power whatever to assess property of railroad other than the statute confers upon it. The conclusion of the court Is that all other property of a railroad, other than above stipulated, must be assessed by the County Assessor and returned by him to the Auditor
 The case Is of especial interest to Jeffer- son County, since the Louisville and Nashville railroad owns such valuable depot property there, which they were seeking to have the State Board assess all of its depot and other property. The State Board declines to make the assess ment in the face of the courts decision.
 Other Decisions.
 The court handed down the following decisions today:
 Mcclellan, c. J.-Emma M. Pearson vs. Eugenie B. Adams ct al; appeal from Tallapoosa Circuit Court affirmed.
 John Maxwell vs. the State of Alabama; appeal from Bibb Circuit Court; reversed end remanded.
 Southern Railway Company vs. c. R. Cowan, administrator, etc.; appeal from Etowah Circuit Court; affirmed
 Tyson, J.-Fred Lightsy vs. the State of Alabama; appeal from Bibb County Court; reversed and rendered and defen- dant discharged.
 Alex Ford vs. the State of Alabama: appeal from Coffee Circuit Court; af- firmed
 Littleton Gordon vs the State of Ala bama; appeal from Wilsox Circuit Court; affirmed.
 Sharpe, JIG. M. McGhee ct al, re- ceivers vs. Marfah Reynolds: appeal from Morgan Circuit Court; reversed and re- manded.
 s. J. Carlton vs. James r. Henry ct al appeal from Gadsden City Court; re- versed and remanded.
 Dowdell, J.-Mobile Land Improvement Company vs Herschel R, Gass; appeal from Mobile Chancery Court: affirmed; Tyson. J. dissenting. ts
 Louisville and Nashville Railroad Com pany vs Joseph s. Smith; appeal from Birmingham City Court; reserved and re- manded.