The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1902-06-22
AS Was First Seen by
Montgomery.
Continued from Ninth Page

taxes referred to in section so does not
admit OF question. To that extent the
act is clear and explicit, neither re-
curing nor permitting Interpretation.
The only point susceptible of doubt is
as to the time when such assessment
should be made. This point we must
confess gave us some trouble. And yet
If we give effect to all parts of the acts,
we can come but to one conclusion 1t
seems clear to us that the General As
sembly intended sections 40 and so of
the act IN question to go into immediate
operation. If otherwise, why should they
have been put into the act at all? We
must take judicial notice that under our
Constitution and laws another Legisla-
ture will be elected and in session be-
fore the month of June, 1903. 1t is COM
mon knowledge, appearing from our
public statutes and legislative journals,
that each Legislature passes it's own
revenue and machinery acts which are
intended to be, and usually are, COM
plete in themselves. 1t can scarcely be
presumed that the Legislature of 1901
deliberately did so vain thing as either
to attempt to bind that of 1903 by anti
cipatory legislation on the one hand, or,
on the other, to pass an act which it did
not intend to be operative. Moreover,
1t is obvious that the assessment re-
qGired by section so is to be based upon
the statements prescribed in section 40,
and yet those statements are by the very
terms OF said section to be made Sin
the month of June annually Why
should they be made annually if they are
to be acted upon only quadrennially?
why have four separate and distinct sets
OF annual statements when only one can
be of any possible use? These state
ments must necessarily vary, as does
the value of all personal property. as
times are good or bad. The value of
railroad property especially is peculiarly
susceptible to the changes produced by
the contraction and expansion of the
general business of the country There
fore, what might be a fair valuation for
one wear might be grossly excessive or
inadequate for the remaining three
years. Real property is not subject to
such sudden and violent fluctuations, or
at least to far less degree Hence it
is the long established rule in this State
TO assess the real property of indvid-
uals only once in every four years, while
their personal property is assessed an
nually The value of intangible property
is much more liable to fluctuation than
even tangible personal property, and
hence the greater property of an an
nual assessment. These reasons, with
none apparently to the contrary, force
us to the conclusion that the act in
tended that sections 40 and so should
apply 20 the assessment of 1901 and an
nGally thereafter.
Great stress is laid upon the fact that
section as of the act of 1901, which is
substantially a re-enactment of section
43 of the act of 1899, changes the latter
section by emitting the words ION the
hrst day of June of each year. and in
sorting the words "at such dates as real
estate is required to be assessed for
taxation From this it is argued that
the Legislature intended that the fran
Ch1se should be assessed for taxation
only once in four years, like real estate.
and therefore should not be assessed
until 1903. The fallacy of this argument
lies in the fact that section As of the
act OF 1901 and section 40 of the act of
1899 are both by their express terms
limited to the tangible or physical prop
crty of the railroads and do not pretend
to relate to the assessment of the fran
chise. Section As says: 1.-The president,
shall at slch dates as real es-
tate is required to be assessed for taxa
ton return to the said commissioners
for assessment and taxation, verified by
the oath or affirmation of the officer
making the return. all the following
described property belonging to such
corporation within this State, viz" . =
Then follows a specific description of the
n III, -
property without the slightest allusion
to the franchises or intangible property.
lnclusio unius est exclusio alterius.
If the Legislature had intended section
as to apply to franchises it could very
easily have said SO. In fact it would
have been easier to have said "alI prop
erty, both tangible and intangible, in
GLIDING franchises" than to have said,
as it does say. 'all the following de-
scribed property followed by a long
list of specific kinds of tangible property
alone. The fact that neither section As
nor its prototypes has ever alluded to
the assessment of the franchise, which
has always been regulated by other sec
lions seems conclusive. Those sections
both in the act of 1901 and that of 1899,
which refer to the franchises, all provide
mains Does the act, exclusive of section
4S, provide sufficient machinery for an
nual assessments of the intangible prop
erty of railroad corporations. We think
it does. Section 40 expressly provides
that all railroad companies shall report
annually to the Corporation Commission
''(5) The total assessed value of all the
tangible property in the State" This
obviously refers to the present assess
ment of the tangible property that has
already been made. We cannot suppose
that the Legislature intended to say that
the railroad companies should report in
the years 1901 and 1902 an assessment
that would not be made until 1908. The
gift of prophecy is not of legislative
origin. Moreover, section 40 also pro-
vides that railroad companies shall, if
required by the Corporation Commits
sion, furnish annually in the month of
June all the information set out in Sc
tion 1853 of The Code. This latter section
contains 80 different questions complete
ly covering in detail the total cost of
the road and equipment, with it's char
acteristics, transactions, cost of mainte-
rance operation and repair the amount