State v. O'Brien

• Decision Date: 15 November 1886
• Parties: STATE ex rel. GRISWOLD v. O'BRIEN, President, etc.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

1 S.W. 763

89 Mo. 631

STATE ex rel. GRISWOLD v. O'BRIEN, President, etc.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

November 15, 1886.

TAXATION — CONSTITUTIONAL RULES — UNIFORMITY IN ASSESSMENT — RATE OF TAXATION — CHARTER OF ST. LOUIS, ART. 5, § 22.

Section 22, art. 5, of the charter of the city of St. Louis, (Rev. St. Mo. 1602,) providing that "lands in the limits of the city which have not been laid off into blocks or lots shall not be assessed or taxed otherwise than by the acre, as agricultural lands," is in conflict with section 4, art. 10, of the constitution, declaring that "all property subject to taxation shall be taxed in proportion to its value," and is not warranted, even as to property included in the city by the extension of its limits, by the provision of section 23, art. 9, of the constitution, allowing "the graduation of the rate of taxation" upon such property.

Original proceeding. Certiorari.

H. D. Wood, for relator. Leverett Bell, for respondent.

HENRY, C. J.

This is a proceeding by certiorari to bring before this court for review the action of the board of equalization in the assessment of relator's land for taxation for city purposes. The relator owns about 77 acres of land within the new limits of the city of St. Louis, which has never been laid off into blocks and lots, and, at the time of the assessment, was rented as agricultural land, for farming purposes, at $800 per annum, which relator alleges is as much as the land is worth per annum for agricultural purposes. Prior to March 31, 1886, said tract was assessed at $144,130, which, on appeal to the board, was reduced to $130,455, an increase of $55,555 over any previous assessment. Relator charges that the board, on his appeal, did not, in passing upon the question, act upon the evidence adduced; but without and contrary to evidence, refused to assess it as agricultural land, and arbitrarily fixed such a valuation upon the land as in their opinion it would be worth if laid out into blocks and lots.

The return to the writ simply shows the reduction of the valuation, as alleged in the petition, but neither the testimony upon which the board acted, nor any part thereof, accompanies the return. Counsel are agreed, however, that the only question for our consideration is what meaning is to be attached to, and what effect to be given, section 22, art. 5, of the charter of the city of St. Louis, (Rev. St. 1602,) which is as follows: "Lands in the limits of the city, which have not been...