The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1902-03-13
SEN. WARDS ARGUMENT
Concluding Points Made by Mr.. Wal
ker For the Defense.
VALUE OF FRANCHISES is siOS, 100000
Corporation Commissioners, Says Mr.. Ward,
Must Follow the Method of Taxing The
Franchises as Mapped Out
by the Legislature.


ing the argument in the case of Jack
son against the Corporation Commission
was concluded. Mr.. Platt B. Walker, of
Charlotte, finished his argument in de-
Tense of the Commissioners and Sena-
tor II. S. Ward, of Plymouth, made the
concluding argument for the plaintiff.
Sheriff Jackson, the plaintiff, alleges
that the Corporation Commission, with
authority to assess for taxation all rail-
road property of companies exercising the
right of eminent domain, had failed and
refused to- assess for taxation and de-
,rtermine the value of the intangible prop
erty of the railroad companies of the
State, the franchises separately from the
tangible property The value of such
franchises is said to be about Sos, 900 900
The plaintiff asked that mandamus be
issued compelling the Corporation Com
= mission to assess the franchises and do
all in their power to collect the taxes
this was refused in Wake county Su-
!! perior court at the September term, Judge
w. s. OBJ. Robinson, presiding, and the
plaintiff appealed.
At the converting of court yes
terday. Mr.. Walker, resumng his
argument for the defense, con-
tended that by section so of the act
of 1901'it was specially provided that in
order TO determine the true value of the
J franchise it was the duty of the commits
sioners to ascertain and consider the
gross earnings as compared with the
operating expenses, and particularly the
value placed upon the whole property by
( the people, as evidenced by the mar
.ket value. of all capital stock, certif-
Gates of indebtedness. bonds or other Sc
curities, the value of which is based upon
the earning capacity of the property, and
that they should deduct therefrom the
value of the tangible property; and that
the remainder shall be the value Of the
franchise!
The plaintiff contends that this assess
ment of the franchise must be made an
nually,aw while the defendant insists that
it can be made only i'll 1908 and every
four years thereafter.
Mr.. Walker further argued that before
the value of the franchise could be as
detained it was necessary first to ascer-
tain the value of the tangible property,
and as this could not be done until 1903,
it was plain that the value of the fran
He called attention to the fact that for
many years preceding the Legislature of
1901, the machinery acts had provided
that the property of railroads should be
returned for taxation annually, but that
by the act of 1901 radical change had
been made, which provides that railroad
property shall be assessed every four
years and that such action by the Legis-
lature was based upon the recommends
ton of Governor Aycock, and was part
of the compromise and adjustment of liti-
cation pending between the State of North
Carolina and certain railroad companies
before the converting of the Legislature
of 1901
Senator Ward, for the plaintiff, made
the following points in his argument:
I'VE submit that the franchise of rail-
reads is property; that it is recognized
in the Machinery Act as taxable l. e.,
is required to be taxed; thai defendants
admit they have taxed it under the law,
and therefore can't be heard to say it is
not the duty to tax it either under sec
tion So or some other section of some
other law; that in so taxing it they have
made its valuation only nominal clearly
appears in the answer; that such a course,
apart from the mandate of section so of
the Machinery Act, is violation of the
Constitution, Art. V, section 3, because
if the franchise of railroad companies is
taxed at all Git is discretionary with the
Legislature), they must be taxed not
nominally but according to their true
value in money Commissioners VS. To-
bacco Co., lie n. c., page AL. If the de-
PENDANTS mean to say in their answer
that the value of all the property of the
three lines of railroad mentioned in their
answer, page s, tangible and intangible,
including capital stock, certificates Of in
debtedness, bonds and other securities.
the value of W hich is based upon the
earning capacity of the property, is only
$35, SIS, $50 we respectfully submit that
the court ought to so far take notice
of its enormity as to hold he same to be
fraudulent
1.-The defendants can not adopt a meth
cd of taxing the franchise OF their own,
but must follow the method mapped out
by the Legislature. The Legislature can
as well instruct them how to assess, as
what to assess
I'm the argument in the court below it
was frankly stated that the case turned
upon the question whether section 80.
Chapter Z Public Laws of 1901, was now
in force, or whether its operation was de-
ferred by necessary implication drawn
from the language of section As. 1t was
contended and relied on, as the only de-
Tense to this action, that the Legislature
did not intend that section so should be
effective until real estate is assessed for
taxation, which will not be until June,
1903
This contention is based on the fact
that section AZ requires the principal Off
GERS of the railroads, as often as real
estate is to be assessed for taxation, to
make reports to the defendant board OF
the number of miles of railroad lines in
the State. including the road bed. right
of-way and superstructures thereon. main
and side-tracks; depot buildings and depot
grounds. section and Lighthouses. rolling
stock and personal property necessary for