The Yale expositor., 1906-03-02
MICHIGAN
HAPPENINGS
THE GALBRAITH LAW IS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL
SAYS COURT.
COMMISSION MUST LEVY TAX ON
THE RAILROADS AT $17.4o
PER $1,000.
JUSTICE MONTGOMERY WROTE
THE OPINION WHICH ALL
CONQUERED IN.
The Law Is Void.

The Galbraith equalization law is I'M
constitutional. What the last legisla-
ture sought to do in the passage OF the
Galbraith law was held void by the SUI
preme court in an opinion rendered
shortly before noon Monday. The court
grants the writ of mandamus applied
for by Acknowledgement Bird, To COM
pei the state board of assessors to
reconvene and fix rate for the taxa
ton of railroads that shall be deter
mined by using the assessed value of
the general property OF the state as
the devisor of the total amount of
taxes paid. This rate is s17.40 per
$1,000, instead of $14.61, which the as
SCISSORS found by adding $300,OOO,OOO
to the assessed value of the state on
the theory that general property was
not assessed at cash value.
Justice Montgomery wrote the opin-
ion, which is concurred in by other JUS
tees who sat-McAlvay, Grant, Os-
trander and Hooker.
The opinion quotes the contention
OF Attorney-G General Bird that Section
II of Article II of the constitution pro-
vides the manner of ascertaining the
rate and that the act known as the
Galbraith equalization law was in con-
flict Herewith The railroad compa-
nies contended that the constitution
does not forbid the legislature from
providing for ascertainment of a true
basis of taxation.
The court drew a distinction be-
tween that contention and the position
of the board of assessors, which was
that the constitutional provision itself
conferred upon the board the power TO
determine according to its best judg-
ment what the average rate levied on
other property of the state may be.
1T is not to be denied that the his
tory of the state has shown in the past
many attempts to evade the consti-
tutional provision for the taxation of
property at its full cash value. reads
the opinion. Nor is it intended to i'm
ply that if the corrective was intended
to be conferred by this constitutional
provision upon said board that they
have acted unreasonably or improper
". Indeed &c may be said that with the
statute before them, prima facie, valid,
It called for their action along lines
they followed and for their ascertain
ment according to their best judgment
of the real assessable value Of the
state"
But the court says the question Of
the policy of the constitutional prOvi-
sion is not the controlling question, but
the provision itself, which it quotes.
There is little room for construc-
tion." continues the court. "The inn
portant words are the rate of taxation
upon such property shall be the rate
which the state board of assessors
shall ascertain and determine is the
average rate levied upon other proper
ty upon which adj valorem taxes are
assessed for state, county, township,
school and municipal purposes
ut is very clear that this excludes
all idea that provision might be made
for ascertaining an average rate by
taking an account of property upon
which no taxes are assessed. To do so
would be to do violence to the Ian
guage employed"
The opinion says further that the
question is not an intricate or diff
cult one. THE language employed in
this amendment is plain, clear English.
1t requires no Interpretation"
The opinion is in line with final ac-
tion already taken by the state board
of assessors, which anticipated such a
decision from the court. The applica-
| ton of the rate of $17.40 to railroad
valuations of $203,0O0,000, instead of
the rate of S14.61, means an increase
in taxes of about $550,000 for the rail
roads.