Omaha daily bee., 1904-10-08
RAILROADS WIN TWO CASES
Terminal Taxation Case from Omaha and
Rulo Bridge Case Are Decided
LAW is DECLARED CONSTITUTIONAL
supreme Court Holds that Legislature
Has Power TO Provide the Pres
ent system of Making
AEsesEmcnta.

4-44NNOA4-Ns NfNAa ---AGE'NNAaaf ~
authorities Of Richardson county and the
members OF the Omaha Real Estate ex-
change Of Omaha lost out in their fsht in
the supreme court 10 compel higher val
uation Of railroad property located in their
respective taxing districts as a basis for
county and municipal taxation. The su-
preme court held in both cases that the
Law which provided for the valuation Of
railroad property being fixed by the State
Board Of Equalizs tion and distributed &C.
cording 10 the mileage OF the road was
constitutional The opinions held also that
a depot terminal facilities. bridges and
other structures that were q part Of the
railroad system were to be considered in
the valuation Of the entire system, and
that the local taxing authorities had 10
right 70 assess them separately. Chief
Justice Holcumb wrote the opinion in the
Omaha case and Commissioner Pound
wrote the Richardson county decision. each
following a former decision Of the court
The taxing authorities Of Rulo, In Rich
ardson county. attempted TO assess The
railroad bridge at that place for city taxa
ton purposes and upon being defeated in
the lower court appealed 10 the supreme
court where the decision OF the lower
court was affirmed.
The Omaha case was an original suit in
the supreme court for 4 msndamus to
compel the city council 10 reconvene as q
board Of review and listen to protests
against taking the figures OF the State
Board Of Equalization on the railroad ter
ninal property as a basis OF taxation The
suit was brought by George Morton, w. G.
IRE and others in the answer Of the
city council 1t was set out that that body
had takea the figures returned by the
State Board Of Equalization. which, they
held was one-hfth Of the valuation Of
the Omaha railroad property. and multi
piled 81 by FIVE TO make It uniform with
| the valuation Of other property in Omaha
This writ was also denied. The suits were
| brought under the old revenue law, but
as the new law is practically the same as
the old Law, the decision will apply in re-
gard to the constitutionalty Of the new
I law.
| The syllabus in the Omaha case follows:
syllabus of Omaha Case.
/ In the assessment Of railway property
| Ior mun.cIpal purposes situated in cities Of
| the metropolitan class, such is required
| 10 be listed with and assessed by the state
Board Of BquaLza7ton for general revenue
| ~ and 40 Of chapter q, article /, compiled
! statutes Of 19l, as existing prior TO the
| revenue act Of 1903, IL is made the duty Of
! the tax commissioner or assessor Of such
| city 10 accept the values Of the fractional
| part Of such railroad property situa ted in
| the rnunieips lity as the same is valued and
/ assessed by the State Board Of Equalization
/ and EpportiOned TO such city in accordance
! with the provisions OF SAID act.
! ?. The proportional share Of railway prop
erty as valued and assessed by the State
: Board Of Equalization belonging 10 and
sltuat ted in such city and subject to taxa
tiOn for municipal purposes may be equal
! tzed by The proper authorities l; Of such city
| same as thus ascertained so as to bring
about uniformity Of valuation in respect Of
( municipality.
3. 1t is competent for the legislature to
provide for the valuation and assessment
! Of the property of railroad companies such
1 as is required 10 be listed and scheduled
! With the auditor Of public accounts by sec
/ piled statutes of 1901. as heretofore exist
ing. by 9ne assessing body and for ascer-
tanning the value Of the whole Of such
/ property Of any one railway corporation
/ subject TO taxation in this state as d unit
/ or as an entirety and TO Distribute the
1 value as thus found over the main line or
| track Of such railway company and 10 the
different taxing districts municipalities
etc, on mileage basis.
4 Such a scheme or plan Of assessment
companies as herein provided for state,
violate the provisions Of the fundamental
law commanding uniformity in the valua-
purpose Of raising needfui revenues BY
the levving OF a tax upon all property sub
Ject thereto according to tbs value.
DiEtrIbutiOn of Value.
5. The valuation and assessment Of the
property OF a railway company, as therein
ton Of the value thus ascertained upon a
mileage basis over the entire line Of such
Of the status Of the property assessed. Its
effect is only TO distribute the value Of an
organic whole to the fractional parts stu
ated in the different subordinate taxing dis
tr1cts through which the line extends and
in which the property is actually situated,
which is legitimate exercise OF legislative
s-in the assessment Of railway property
for taxation as therein provided il is COM
petent for the legislature 10 classify such
property and provide for the assessment
Of the same Hs personally and 10 fx the
status Of the property ASSESSED by providing
for the valuation OF the property as an
entirety and the distribution Of the total
value 10 each taxing district according 10
the number Of miles Of main track located
Z. said sections 80 and 4e as existing prior
TO their repeal by the revenue act of 1919
are not invalid as taking property by taxa
tion without due process OF law G. B. &
G r R Co. against Richardson county.
Para graph Of the syllabus has been in-
terpreted 10 mean that the city board Of
review has not the power 10 Increase the
valuation OF railroad property in its juris-
diction or decrease il. as il will. but that
If the state board assesses on q fifth
valuation and the city properly Is assessed
al its cash value. then the board Of review
has the authority 10 multiply by Eve in
order 10 make the assessment uniform.
RuIo Bridge Case.
In the Rulo bridge case four objections
were made TO the plan Of assessing rail-
road property as prescribed by the stat
utes The FIRST was that sections 80 and
40 in legal effect exempt the franchises
Of railroad corpora tons from taxation and
thereby violate section Of article TX of the
constitution" The court held that this
objection was disposed Of sufficiently in
the case Of the State against Savage in
which the court held that the State Board
Of Equalization in the Assessment Of rail-
road and telegraph properties should In
clude in SITS assessment the value Of the
franchises with the tangible property as
sesssd In that opinion Judge Holcomb
held that the whole property Of any cor
poration would be assessed IN its entirety
and in such valuation should include all
elements that go TO make up the property !
whether franchises other intangible
property. real or physical property or per-
sonal property mixed
The next objection was that the statutes
provided a different manner OF assessing
railroad property from other property and
therefore the section is void because the
uniformity clause OF the constitution Is