Case Name: SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY v. CALIFORNIA
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1896-03-16
Citations: 162 U.S. 167
Docket Number: No. 560
Parties: SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY v. CALIFORNIA.
Judges: Mb. Justice White concurred in the result.
Reporter: United States Reports
Volume: 162
Pages: 167–170

Head Matter:
SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY v. CALIFORNIA.
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
No. 560.
Argued January 15, 16, 1896.
Decided March 16, 1896.
Central Pacific Railroad Company v. California, ante 91, affirmed and followed.
The case is stated in the opinion.
Mr. J. Hiibley Ashton, (-with whom was Mr. Charles H. Tweed on the brief,) for plaintiff in error.
Mr. J. P. Langhorne and Mr. J. II. Miller, (with whom was Mr. W. F. Fitzgerald, Attorney General of the State of California, on the brief,) for defendant in error.

Opinion:
The Chief Justice
: This is a writ of error to a judgment of the Supreme Court of the State of California affirming the judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco, and affirming an order of the Superior Court denying a new trial, in an action brought in the name of the people.of the State of California against the Southern Pacific Railroad Company, under section 3670 of the Political Code of California, for the recovery of moneys alleged to.be due as taxes to the State, and the thirteen counties of the State in which the Southern Pacific Railroad is operated, under an assessment made by the state Board of Equalization, for the purpose of state and county taxation for the fiscal year 1887. The Congressional .and state legislation calls for no special remark as contradistinguished from that in respect of the Central Pacific company. 14 Stat. 292, act of July 27, 1866, c. 278; 16 Stat. 573, act of March 3, 1871, c. 122; 17 Stat. 59,-act of May 2, 1872, c. 132; act of California, April 4, 1870, Cal. Stat. 1869-70, 883, c. 579 ; Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, 118 U. S. 394, 399. The record is sub stantially a duplicate, mutatis mutandis, of the record of the case in The Central Pacific Railroad Company v. The People of the State of California, and the Supreme Court of California on appeal decided this case on the authority of its decision in that. People v. Southern Pacific Railroad, 105 California, 576. We have just affirmed that judgment of the Supreme Court of California, and this must take the same course.
Judgment affirmed.
Mb. Justice White concurred in the result.