Arizona republican., 1920-03-12
STANDARD O|L SUITS SETTLED AND TAXES
 ID BE AGAIN FIXED

Concluding to let bygones be by zones and to begin all over again in it's dispute with the California Stand ard Oil company, officials who repre- sent that concerns interests in Ari- ] zona, tEe state tax commission yester- day arranged with the United States
 district court here, Judge David F. Dyer, presiding, for a conclusion of the
 1918 and 1919 cases on a compromise settlement that results in cleanup
 O. all legislation to date between the
 commission and the oil concern. The
 case was dismissed upon stipulation
 by counsel on both sides that the suits
 were settled out of court.
 Chairman C. NJ. Zander of the com
 mission late yesterday said that the
 compromise settlement was entirely
 satisfactory to the commission, in
 view of the complicated circumst tances,
 even though it did not carry out the
 commissions idea of the cOmpany'S
 valuation for taxation purposes. With
 a clean slate to work upon, freed of
 all the complications and technicali-
 ties that arose in the course of the
 two cases now concluded, the chair man believes that the commission can proceed to fix the company's tax bill for 1920 without bucking up against countless and unforeseen legal ob
 stacIes.
 The suits against the Standard Oil company of California. in connection with that concerns business interests in Arizona, have to do with differences of opinion between the company and the Arizona authorities in regard to assessment valuations of the com pany's properties here. As the com
 pany had properties in every county, there was a prospect of separate ac tio1g in every county court to settle the differences of opinion between the company and the various county as- sessors. The company. in 1918, caused the disputed valuation to be brought before the United State district court here, on various grounds.
 The tax commission objected to the federal Jurisdiction and was sustained ! by the federal court, but the Standard i Oil company then appealed to the l federal court of appeals at San Fran 1 cisco where the decision of the dis trict court was reversed. The con [ tentior of the oil company was sus- tained in every particular, the case be- | ing remanded to the United States | district court here for trial. The 1919 l dispute was placed on a similar foot ing and both cases came up for trial | here together.
 According to the oil company's re- | turns for 1918 the company's property | in this state had a valuation of s342. 900, and a 1919 valuation of approXi- mately s350,000. The state tax com mission desired to fix the valuations at much higher figure but in order to get rid of the two cases it yester- day agreed on a compromise basis to q valuation of approximately A30, 900 for 1918 and of s610,000 for 1919.
 With all court obstacles now re- moved the tax commission proposes to affiX the 1920 valuations in accordance | with it's own ideas, Chairman Zander says, and hopes to keep clear of many | future legal entanglements because of | the experience it has secured during 1918 and 1919. II
 The officers of the Standard Oil II of California, in conference here with the tax commission off cials, were Treasurer R. c. Warner, IT. M. Whteley of the tax 2 nd insurance department. Managing Agent F. G. Ferguson, for Arizona territory, and Attorney John Mason Ross.
 The tax commissions legal repre- sentative in the two cases were Alex Baker, assistant attorney general, and 2. William Kramer, acting assistant attorney general.