People v. Int'l Salt Co.

• Decision Date: 10 April 1908
• Citation: 84 N.E. 278,233 Ill. 223
• Parties: PEOPLE v. INTERNATIONAL SALT CO.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

233 Ill. 223

84 N.E. 278

PEOPLE

v.INTERNATIONAL SALT CO.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Feb. 20, 1908.

Rehearing Denied April 10, 1908.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Cook County; Lockwood Honore, Judge.

Action by the people of the state of Illinois against the International Salt Company of Illinois. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Runnells & Burry, for appellant.

Iles & Martin, for the People.

FARMER, J.

This was an action of debt brought by appellee against appellant in the circuit court of Cook county to recover unpaid taxes assessed and levied for the years 1904 and 1905 against certain property of appellant. The property is described in the declaration as a ‘leasehold estate and improvements (except United States life saving station) on Illinois Central Railroad Pier No. 1, lying south of and adjoining the Chicago river in southeast quarter, section ten (10), township thirty-nine (39) north, range fourteen (14) east of the third principal meridian, situated in Cook county and state of Illinois.’ The declaration alleges ‘that said leasehold and improvements are on the right of way of the Illinois Central Railroad Company, and are assessed and taxed as real estate, in accordance with the statute in such case made and provided.’ Pier No. 1 is occupied by tracks of the Illinois Central Railroad and buildings suitable for use as freight sheds and warehouses. On the 21st of March, 1902, the Illinois Central Railroad Company, by a lease in writing, leased to the appellant the property assessed for the taxes sought to be collected in this suit. The lease was for five years from the 1st day of February, 1902. Under the lease appellant took possession of the buildings on the premises therein described, which buildings were erected by and were the property of the Illinois Central Railroad Company, and used them for the storage of salt and other merchandise. Although authorized by the lease to erect new and additional buildings, none have ever been erected. The lease required appellant to pay all taxes and assessments, general or special, that might be legally assessed against the said demised premises during the term of the appellant's tenancy. The books made up by the county clerk of Cook county in the year 1903, which was the quadrennial year for the assessment fo real estate, containing a list of the taxable property, did not include appellant's leasehold interest in the property here in controversy, and it was not assessed for taxation for that year. Said county clerk did not make up any list of said property for the purpose of assessment and taxation in 1904 or in 1905, but the board of assessors added the property to the list made in the books furnished by the county clerk in the year 1903, and assessed the same upon a valuation fixed by the board of assessors, and the tax so levied was extended against the property. The taxes for 1904 not having been paid, the collector applied for and obtained a judgment and order of sale of the property. The proof shows the property was not sold when offered for sale, but was forfeited to the state. The tax for the year 1905 not having been paid, the amount of the forfeiture for the taxes for the previous year was carried forward and added to it, and upon application of the collector a judgment was entered for the sale of the property to pay the same. The total amount of this judgment was $3,675.39. The record shows the property was not sold, but was again forfeited, and this suit was brought in debt to recover said taxes. Appellant pleaded nil debet, and the cause was tried before the court without a jury, and resulted in a judgment in favor of appellee for $3,675 and costs. From that judgment, this appeal is prosecuted.

It is contended by appellant that the property taxed is not subject to taxation, because it is a part of the Illinois Central Railroad right of way, and also that if it is taxable it could only be taxed as personal property, and, being assessed and taxed as real estate, the tax is void. The authorities cited in support of these propositions are not applicable to this case, for the reason that the statute in force when those cases were decided was an entirely different one from the present statute. Section 60, c. 120, Hurd's Rev. St. 1905, is as follows: ‘When real estate, which is exempt from taxation, is leased to another whose property is not exempt, and the leasing of which does not make the real estate taxable, the leasehold estate and the appurtenances shall be listed as the property of the lessee thereof, or his assignee, as real estate.’ Clearly this statute makes the leasehold estate of appellant subject to taxation, and requires it to be taxed as real estate.

The revenue act of 1898 (Hurd's Rev. St. 1905, c. 120, § 297) provides for the election of a board of assessors in counties containing 125,000 or more inhabitants, and said board has the powers and is required to perform the duties of township assessors under the law. Tolman v. Salomon, 191 Ill. 202, 60 N. E. 809. It is contended that the board of assessors had no authority to assess any real estate except that described in the lists required by section 10, Act 1898 (Hurd's Rev. St. 1905, c. 120, § 304), to be made by the county clerk. That section required the county clerk, in the quadrennial year for the assessment of real estate, to make lists in books provided for that purpose, and annually to make up lists, before the 1st day of April, of lands and lots which are taxable, or which shall become taxable for the first time, and are not already listed. Appellant contends there is no authority by the revenue act conferred upon the board of assessors to assess any real estate omitted from the lists...