Gloucester County Democrat. (Woodbury, N.J.) 1878-1932, 1901-06-13
Trolley Roadbeds are Real Estate.

Trolley Roadbeds are Real Estate.
week ago we called attention to an
important suit pending in the Supreme
Court, which would determine whether the
roadbeds OF trolley roads should be taxed as
real estate or personal property. The de-
clslon was handed down last Monday and
IS the most sweeping on the subject of tax
alton ever reached in this State The case
was that of the Mayor and Common Coun-
Gil OF the City of Newark against the State
Board of Taxation and the North Jersey
Traction Company
The case was up on certiorari from an
order of the State Board of Taxation.
Newark's assessors assessed the trolley
company's roadbed as real estate, fixing the
assessment at Sd, 100000. The State Board
OF Taxation reduced the assessment to about
81, 265, 900, on the ground that the trolley
company had no greater right in the high
ways than any foot traveller or any other
vehicle.
This raised the issue fatty as to whether
the permanency of the rails of a trolley
road on highway were of such character
as to give the trolley road additional rights
over Others, under the statute; or, in other
words, whether the privilege of excluding
others from the soil occupied by the rails
and stringers was not such control or
appropriation of the soil as to make the
company's roadbed liable to taxation as real
estate without comforting upon the company
any greater rights than any other vehicles.
CAN TAX RoADREDs
The Court decides that the trolley he'd is
such a permanent occunation Of +be soiI of
the highway as to mako If +avabla as real
estate.
The decision means that in future every
municipality and every township and every
separate taxing district in the State will
have the right to tax so much of tbe road
bed of any trolley runninc throuoh such
municipality or separate taxing district.
And this tax to be imposed is in addition
to the tax imposed by the State Board of
Taxation for the States own purposes.
The decision reviews the case as above
and then goes on to say:
HOW TAx Was ,sercsrn
ssThe assessment of the Nawarly BOARD
was imnosed nnder the act of Anil II
1866.
s'The second section provides that all real
estate whether owned bv ind;y;d,,oIs or
corporations. shall he liable to taxation aft
its full yaIue.
'sThe third section provides that the Term
real estate. as used in the act shall he con-
strued to include all lands. all water mower
thereon or appurtepances thereto. and all
buildings or erections underwood Growing
thereon, and all mines. ouarries. etc
'sThe company has the Grant of mart of
the public estate for its own nermanent
exclusive use. and that is an interest in real
estate. This part must be of the same
character as the whole
1.-THE assertion that the RIGHT in tbe soil
of the highway acouired and used nv the
trolley company is no greater than that
enioved nv fine nuhIic in GENERAL is NOT
only in conflict with the evidence of our
senses. Init is rejected nv the ad;ndgad cases
on the subject.
cit is SUGGESTED that the nub1;c autbori-
ties hold their legal title IN The biohu,a,1 as
trustees for an the neonIe and that = tr,,Stea
is without canacity to mart With it's Local Local
title 10 what f holds IL tT,Ist -Ne''-
esTbere il no, sncb GENERAL Ieoo1 rr1o ,,.l,-
inc trustee incanabIe of tbe transno;Ssion
of the 1aooF t;tIo ha ,,o,,,a ~ A. +r
tees in that respect depends unon the fact
whether it is consistent with and in due
execution of his trust. It NAV be that in
the execution of the trust he must convey
his entire legal estate or a mart of If or a
lesser estate.
SIN the case of this street railway COM
many. the Legislature has authorized the
city of Newark to grant to the companv
the exclusive use of a portion of the soil Of
the streets The grants have been made
and our Courts have upheld such grants as
valid and effectual.
ssIf this railway company was without
this legal right and without the justification
based upon it. it would be indictable for
maintaining public nuisance in the high
way.
mo one would doubt that individual
who, without express authority, occupied
the street with a like obstruction would
be amenable to the criminal law.
I'm New York the city owns the fee of
the streets, but as the public authorities
hold it in trust for public uses as high
way they have no greater capacity to con-
vey part of their legal estate than the
public authorities in this State have to con-
vey part of the lesser estate vested in them
in trust
GIsT OF THE OPINION.
Il ssIn nv Judgment. therefore the street
railway company has such an interest in
the soil of the highways over which it is
i'l ss n aot;o 81 % +b 9'' So Poara % n.
alton was based upon an erroneous legal
nrinciple and should be set asiden