Pacific R.R. v. Watson

• Decision Date: 31 October 1875
• Parties: PACIFIC RAILROAD, Respondent, v. J. C. WATSON, et al., Appellants.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

61 Mo. 57

PACIFIC RAILROAD, Respondent,

v.J. C. WATSON, et al., Appellants.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

October Term, 1875.

Appeal from Cole Circuit Court.

J. N. Litton, for Appellants.

I. The act of March 10th, 1871, made no provision for assessing the railroad property for that year, nor did it repeal the provisions of the city charter of Jefferson City, by which it had the right to assess the property. (Carondelet vs. Picot, 38 Mo., 125; State ex rel. vs. Severance, 55 Mo., 378.)

E. L. Edwards & Son, for Respondent.

I. Objections for misjoinder cannot be raised after a trial upon the merits, and by a motion in arrest. (Ashley vs. Winston, 26 Mo., 210; Russell vs. DeFrance, 39 Mo., 511; Miss. Planing Mill vs. Presbyterian Church, 54 Mo., 520. Kerr vs. Bell, 44 Mo., 120; Soeding vs. Bartlett, 35 Mo., 94; Ruegger vs. Linderberger, 53 Mo., 364; Kotte vs. Menier, 50 Mo. 158.)

II. Whatever power, if any, the assessor of Jefferson City may have had to assess defendant's property was taken away by the act of March 10th, 1871 (Sess. Acts 1871, p. 56). This whole subject has been carefully examined, and the point expressly decided in State ex rel. vs. Severance (55 Mo., 378).

VORIES, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

This was a proceeding by writ of certiorari sued out of the Cole Circuit Court, requiring the defendants to certify up to said Circuit Court, their action as a Board of Appeals to correct the tax assessment made by the Assessor for the city of Jefferson for the year 1871, wherein a certain assessment had been made against said railroad company.

The record in this case is a long one, and is gotten up in a very confused manner; but the facts necessary to an understanding of the main points involved in the case are few, and substantially as follows:

The mayor and board of aldermen of the city, had power, by virtue of its charter, passed in February, 1839, by ordinance to levy and collect taxes upon real and personal property within the city limits. An ordinance was afterwards passed defining what kinds of property should be subject to taxation by the city authorities. By this ordinance all property was assessed for each year, to persons owning the same, on the first day of April in the respective years, but the yearly assessments were not made until after the first Monday in May. It was also provided by the ordinance that the board of Alderman of the city, after a return was made of the assessment lists by the city assessor for each year, should be authorized to resolve itself into a Court of Appeals to hear and determine all appeals from the assessments, and to decide the same and correct the assessment lists, etc. In the year 1871 the city assessor, by virtue of the ordinance before referred to, made the following assessment against the Pacific Railroad Company, to-wit:

“Received of the Pacific Railroad company _______ dollars, being the amount of city taxes for the year 1871, in the city of Jefferson, on real estate as below detailed, including poll and personal property; Depot, $12,000; machine shops and round house, $5,000; 15 engines, at $10,000 each, $150,000; 2 freight cars, $2,000; 1 mile of track, $8,000; total value, $177,000; amount of tax, $2,665.”

When the aldermen of the city afterwards met as a Court of Appeals, etc., and while they were in session as such, the Pacific Railroad company, by its attorneys, appeared before said court and filed its written protest against said assessment, claiming that said property was not liable to taxation by said city, and further that if any part of said property should be liable to taxation by said city, it could only be assessed and taxed under the act of the General Assembly passed March 10, 1871, and in the manner by said act prescribed, and therefore asked that said assessment be set aside or quashed, and that the same be corrected, etc. After several irregular orders made by said Court of Appeals, and a fruitless attempt to compromise the matters of difference, the said board, or Court of Appeals, refused to vacate said assessment or to correct or change the same. The Pacific Railroad company then appeared in the Cole Circuit Court, and filed its petition in the name of the State of Missouri, on its relation, praying for a writ of certiorari, requiring the said Court of Appeals to certify the proceedings in the case to said court, which said writ was issued and returned with the proceedings in the case. The case was heard in the Circuit Court and the assessment was quashed and annulled, and final judgment rendered in favor of the plaintiff. The defendant filed motions for a re-hearing and in arrest of the judgment, both of which being overruled, the defendants appealed to this court.

Several points were made and discussed by the respective parties, both in the Circuit Court and in this court, but with the view that we take of the case it will only be necessary to notice one point or objection made by the plaintiff to the assessment under consideration.

The question made by the defendants in their motion in arrest of the judgment, that there was an improper joinder of parties comes too late when raised for the first time...