Fergus County argus. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1886-1946, 1905-10-24
IMPORTANT DECISION.
Cattle May be Assessed only Wherein
is Located Home Range Of Owner.

Though livestock, ranging IN Mon
tana, may drift into every county in
the state, and though none of the
stock may, on the first Monday in
March, be in the county in which is
located the home range Of the owner,
the stock may be assessed, for purpOs-
es of taxation, only in the county In
which is located the home range of
the owners. To justify assessment
in any other county, the officials must
show that the stock were driven into
such county and remained there with
the knowledge and consent of the own
er.
Such is the purpOrt of the decision
just given by Judge Tattan, in the
suit, tried at Glasgow, of the Coburn
Cattle Co. VS.. S. G. Small, treasurer
of Valley county. The action was a
test case, in which stockmen all over
the state had taken much interest,
and the decision is of great importance
to them.
Attorney Fletcher Maddox, who ap-
peared for the Coburns in the case,
returned to his home yesterday morn
ing, having secured the decision for
which he had asked. after several
ney of Valley county was assisted by
G. B. Nolan, of Helena, former attOr-
ney general.
The home ranch and home range
of the COburns are in ChOuteau cOun.
ty, but their cattle stray into Valley
Dawson, Custer, Teton and Fergus
counties, about 1900 head of the Circle
C. cattle were in Valley county. But
all the testimony showed that, every
fall, the Coburns round up all the cat
tie they can find and return them tc
Chouteau county. Before the winter
storms the cattle drift for many miles
and on the first Monday in March, al
which time the assessment is presum
ably made, many of the cattle are ir
counties other than Chouteau.
| In 1903, the assessor of Valley coun
ty assessed the Coburns for 1900 hea(
of cattle in that county. They asked
that the assessment be Cancelled, bu
the board of equalization refused tt
cancel the assessment, and the Co
burns paid the taxes under protest, a
the same time paying taxes on thu
same cattle to the treasurer of Chou
teau county. The same thing was re
peate1 in 1904 and again this year
But Immediately after paying the 100:
taxes, the Coburns brought suit to re
cover the amount from Valley county
and it was agreed that the decision il
that suit would apply to all taxes pait
later, under the same circumstances
When the case came to trial, few
days ago, the evidence was conclusive
that the home range of the COburn
is in Chouteau county; that their cal
tie found in Valley county had drifte
into that county without their comm,
ance, and without their knowledge, an
that they made practice of return
ing all their cattle to Chouteau cour
ty at the time of the usual roundup
Under this showing, Judge Tattan ru
ed that the cattle could be assesse
in Chouteau county alone and CAV
Judgment against Valley county for al
. the money paid by the Coburns unde
protest.
| Under the tax laws, it is almost in
possible to reverse action of boar
. of equalization: to do requires litigs
ton and much expense. If Judge Ia
tan's decision had been against tn
Coburns contention, all their cattl
. might have been assessed in each c
several counties. and they would hav
been constantly annoyed by litigation
/. besides having much money tied III
l Many other stockmen in the state OF
: crate under similar conditions, henc
many were interested in the OutcOm
5 of the suit and will be pleased by tn
result.