Anderson v. Chicago, B.&Q.R. Co.

• Decision Date: 15 May 1886
• Citation: 117 Ill. 26,7 N.E. 129
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court
• Parties: ANDERSON v. CHICAGO, B. & Q. R. Co.

117 Ill. 26

7 N.E. 129

ANDERSON

v.CHICAGO, B. & Q. R. Co.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

May 15, 1886.

Appeal from Henderson.

SHELDON, J.

The bill in equity in this case was filed by the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company against the collector of taxes of Henderson county, Illinois, to enjoin him from proceeding to collect, through judgment and sale, taxes assessed for the years from 1870 to 1884, both inclusive, upon the east half of a bridge over the Mississippi river opposite Burlington, Iowa. The circuit court decreed the relief prayed, and the defendant appealed.

The single question is, had the assessor of Henderson county, Illinois, in which the east end of the bridge is located, the right to assess the one-half of the bridge, or was it assessable only by the state board of equalization as part of the main track of the railroad of complainant?

It appears that in 1867-68 the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company erected, with its own money, the structure in question, known as the ‘Burlington Bridge,’ across the Mississippi river from a point in Henderson county, Illinois, to a point in Burlington, Iowa, and was then, and has been ever since, the sole owner thereof, and that the bridge is used exclusively as a railroad track,-the total length of the bridge being 2,237 feet; that the railroad company had in each year from the erection of the bridge reported 1,119 feet (or the part thereof within the boundary of Illinois) as part of its main track, and the same had been duly assessed and taxes paid thereon as main track, and that the county of Henderson had annually received its due proportion thereof.

In relation to taxation of the realty of railroads, the general revenue law of 1872 (Rev. St. 1874, c. 120, § 42) provides:

‘Such right of way, including the superstructuresof main, side, or second track or turn-outs, and the station and improvements of the railroad company on such right of way, shall be held to be real estate for the purposes of taxation, and denominated ‘railroad track,’ and shall be so listed and valued.'

By section 43 the value of the ‘railroad track’ shall be listed and taxed in the several counties, towns, villages, districts, and cities in the proportion that the length of the main track in such county, town, village, district, or city bears to the whole length of the road in this state, except the value of the side or second track, and all turn-outs, and all station houses, depots, machine shops, or other buildings belonging to the road, which shall be taxed in the county, town, village, district, or city in which the same are located. The provision of section 109 is that the state board of equalization shall assess the railroad property denominated in the act as railroad track.

The bridge in question was constructed and used by the railroad company as a part of its continuous line of railroad, and we can have no doubt that, under the general revenue law, it comes within the denomination of railroad track, and is to be assessed by the state board of equalization. But, though this might have been the case until 1873, it is contended that since the passage of the act approved May 1, 1873, (Laws 1873, p. 37,) the right to assess has been in the local assessor....