Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1913-12-16
JUDGE Al1RooK RULES AGAINST
w IN DRAIN.
AGE DITCH CASE.
MAY REvoLUrIoNIzE
METHODS OF ASSESSMENT
Effect Of Finding 10 Far Reaching and
the Decision the First Of the Kind
Ever Handed Down In lewa-Su.
promo Court Will Have Opportunity
to Review the Case.
Special to Times-Republican.

Webster City, Dec. 1s.-Judge c. E.
Albrook, sitting in this city, has just
rendered a decision which, II upheld In
the supreme court, will revolut1onize
the method Of assessing railroads for
drainage ditch benefits. In the case OF
the Northwestern railroad On appeal
from an assessment Of 81, 900 in the Ar
mold drainage district south Of this city,
he held that the board of supervisors
| were right in assessing direct Dement'S
and then adding thereto whatever BEN
efts the road derived from the fact
that the drainage ditch made the land
whereabouts more productive both to
the farmer and to the revenue Of the
railroad.
The decision Of Judge Albrook is the
first of it's kind to be delivered in the
state os Iowa. Its effect is far reach
ing and will tend to raise railroad as
sessments generally in drainage i'm
provenents. So revolutionary in his
holding that the decision of the SUI
preme court Will be awaited with un-
usual interest. The ruling. however.
will prove popular and it's fairness Will
probably be generally conceded by the
public and press.
1T has to be conceded" says the rul-
ing of Judge Albrook, that it would
not be fair to compare the railroads
right of way and roadbed with farm
property, because they are Of a differ
ent class and different character. and
put to different uses. The profits OF the
two are different in character and the
result Of a different class Of use and OF
a different character and class Of la
Dor.
Special Benefit to Railroad.
IF the farm property around this 70
cality where the drainage district is to
be established is made more productive
and, as a result. srould bear the
pense Of this improvement in a certain
equitable proportion, every SAN man
knows that the result Of increasing the
productiveness Of the farm property
around Kamrar will increase the pro-
ductiveness of the railroad company
and roadbed, because. as this freight
traffic is increased and the number Of
passengers are increased, the income OF
the railroad company is increased. And
it is a special beneft to the railroad
company that no other person or per-
o n receives. I assume that the at
torneys for the PLAINTIFF the railraod
company would contend that it Is too
speculative in character to be given
any consideration. My Judgment Is.
that the proposition is a new one. to
some extent. at least new in giving
weight in determining how much the
plaintiff company should contribute to-
wards the improvement.
Railroads Increase Farm Tax.
"The railroad company would never
push a line out across a territory uNin-
habited and not settled up and invest
vast sums Of money for which they
can receive no return except as the
people follow the railroad up. and thru
the increased pr~oductiveness Of tho
country. the increased productIveness
of the tonnage and OF passenger traffic,
to recompense them for their invest
ment. And it is legitimate for them to
consider the question that naturally
ome back to the question of revenue
matters. Why shouldn't that be an
element to be considered In determin-
ing what would be equitable for this
specific piece Of property to bear Of the
expense Of an Improvement Of this
character. when hat is the very ele-
ment which must determine what pro-
pO1 NAo LII ~ opCASS IuOSt OSdk .
II am disposed to think that the only
thing for the court to do is to allow this
assessment to stand. I do 1t with re-
l%uctance. yet with no more reluctance
h a I would in cutting the sum from
$1,000 down to one-half. / am sustained
In this by the presumption Of law pre-
vail.ng in favor of he assessment and
in the absence Of n evidence that
would Justify me in arriving at any
other conclusion"
Alb~ook Decision Is Exhaustive.
The ruling in full is quite exhaustive
and goes into the question Of taxes for
improvements quite thoroughly. Judge
Abrook Is apparently not at all fear
full Of a reversal. In the course OF the
written opinion ne shows his feeling of
safety when he say that whether 9TH
er courts rule for or against his judy
ment in the matter, nevertheless the
increased railroads get from
increased productivity OF farm lands
SIS entitled to be considered" in any
court. Attorneys hereabouts express
varying opinions regarding the ruling
but generally are disposed to admit
that Judge Albrook's argument is more
oP less ipdicafiyo oh tho fropa ~ tho