Harrisburg telegraph. [volume] (Harrisburg, Pa.) 1879-1948, 1915-05-01

70 RECOVER eSI1lnaJeu amounts.
Arrangements are being made to-
day for an immediate appeal to the
State Supreme Court from the decision
of the Dauphin County Court uphold
ing the constitutionality of the anthra-
cite coal tax act of 1914 in the test
cases brought by the Alden, Plymouth
and st. Clair coal companies.
Pending action by the companies no
steps will be taken by the Attorney
Generals Department. 1t would act
tNnllect the taxes only in the event OF
pmpanies failing to take the ap-
the Auditor Generals Depart
N having gone ahead and assessed
the tax as required by law. An appeal
would act as a supersedeas.
1t was estimated to-day that the
anthracite tax for a full year would
run between 81, 500, 900 and So, 900, 900.
Under the act in litigation the proceeds
are to be divided equally between the
state and the counties producing an
thracite coal.
Exceptions to the decision of Judge
Kunkel will be taken in a few days
and when overruled the appeal will be
. filed.
Tho opinions are notable for their
lucidity. Judge Kunkel employs Anglo
Saxon in dealing with some of the OBJ
1ections raised and his discussion OF
the points reveals the immense amount
of work done by the Judge.
The main opinion is in the Alden
case and the judge says in the course
of the opinion; I'VE are of the opinion
that the classification of anthracite
coal for taxation is a legitimate one
and that the taxation of such coal as
distinguished from all other kinds of
coal Is not a violation of the consti-
tutionaI provisions referred to-
The court holds that the title of the
act is not defective and that 1t gives
proper notice of what the statute con.
tains and that the act does not contain
more than one subject. While in some
respects the act is declared to be
crudely drawn, an examination leaves
no doubt of legislative intention. The
court holds that the act is not local OIL
special legislation and that 1t does not
pnrport to 1egislate for one particular
locality. Anthracite coal may he found
in other counties in the future. says
the court. and II 1t referred to all coal
the same objection might be raised To
It because coal is not found in many
counties OF Pennsylvania at all. The
act is declared to be statute to raise
revenue for the state and does not reg
uiate the affairs of any. county or mu-
nicipal division.
On the objection that ii imposes
double taxation because coal companies
pay state tax on capital stock the
court says the power of the Legislature
to impose double taxation is well set
tied. In any event the coal might be
shipped out of the state limits before
the period OF appraisement and the
producer thus lavoid payment of a
double tax. because IL It was not owned
II could not he Included in property
| taxable for state purposes
The court disposes Of the contention
i'that II would not be a uniform tax
because the amount returned would re-
lieve some municipalities from some
burden of taxation by saying that the
citizens will stlll be subject to 1ocal
and state taxation and that the relief
| is moi profIbited
On the plea that the act Is conf1s-
lcatorvytlle court SAYS: "If the purpose
for which the tax Is levied Is . public