The Penn's Grove record., 1907-08-09
Railroads r1ust Pay More Taxes

One of the most important decisions
made by the State Supreme Court was
filed by Justice Pitney on Wednesday
at Trenton. 1t upholdS the cOnstitu-
~tionality of the Perkins railroad main
stem tax law and places upon the rail
road companies of the States all addition
al tax to the amount OF about $1,000,
900 OF a total tax of over 81, 500, 0UU.
This decision is of much locallutereSt
because it will turn over 10 the school
fund about -, 500, 100, S24, 34l.oU OF
which will come 10 Salem county, 81,
912.63 10 PENIS Grove, Sofa TO
Upper PennS Neck ana SI,245.3 "a to
Oldham Township.
Under The Perkins law the railroads
will be compelled to pay taxes on their
main stem at the average taX rate OF
The State. Last year the average was
S1.001 per $l00ot valuation. Formerly
this class OF railroad property pad
taxes at one-half of one per ceut., OF
81 cents on each 500 OF valuation.
OF the taxes paid under the Perkins
law ali except One-half OF Il per cent.
are to be devoted to the public Schools
OF the State.
The Importance to the State is shown
by the report OF the State Board of
Assessors. In 1905, the tax OF railroad
main stems, including franchise ana
tangible personal property, was $3.50,
99l. In 1906 under the Perkins act, 1t
was S3,6O3, 529, a net increase OF -,
552, 53o. IL is validity OF the increase
which the Supreme Court sustains. The
roads have already paid III $3.50, OY1, or
the tax under the 81 cents per 500 OF
valuation. The 81, 552. 53S is now due
under the Supreme Court decision.
STATES RIGHT TX CLAssIFY PROPERTY
The railroads attack the law with
70 Wrlts OF certiorari, charging that it
was unconstitutional, violating the
clause OF the constitution which required
that property shall be assessed for
taxes under general laws, and by uni
form rules, according to its true value".
1t was also claimed that it violated the
Fourteenth amendment to the Federal
Constitution,
Justice Pitney inhis opinion discusses
these points at great length. III the
syllabus he says, i'll part:
The1act that all property used forrail
road andcanal purposes may be set apart
in a class by itself, as distinguished from
the general mass of property Ill the State
for purposes Of taxation, does not mega
tive the propriety of subdiyiding this
general class Of property into minO- clas-
ses for the purpose Of taxation; nor is
the subclassitication special, and hence
unconstitutional, provided it rests up
on grounds of discrimination inherent
either in the character of the property
o. its situation and circumstances.
such as to render the distinction reas-
onably appropriate to the. purposes of
the classification.
The constitution requirement of uni
form rules for taxation is satisfied by a
uniformity that obtains without discrimi-
nation throughout a class of property set
apart upon reasonable grounds Tor sepa-
rate treatment. Since the tax laws under
consideration do not deprive the taxpayer
OF property without due process of law.
and since they conform to the constitu-
tional requirements that property shall
be assessed for taxes under general laws.
and by uniform rules according to its true
value 1t follows that they do not DENY
to the taxpayers 'the equal protection OF
the laws"