State v. Hannibal & St. J. R. Co.

• Decision Date: 10 June 1889
• Citation: 13 S.W. 505,101 Mo. 136
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE <I>ex rel.</I> TRAMMEL, Collector, etc., v. HANNIBAL & ST. J. R. Co.

13 S.W. 505

101 Mo. 136

STATE ex rel. TRAMMEL, Collector, etc., v. HANNIBAL & ST. J. R. Co.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

June 10, 1889.

TAXATION — EXEMPTION — RAILROAD COMPANIES.

1. Acts Mo. 1847, p. 157, gives to defendant company all the privileges and immunities which were granted to the Louisiana & Columbia Railroad Company by Acts 1836-37, p. 252, which provide, inter alia, that "the stock of said company shall be exempt from all state and county taxes." Act Sept. 20, 1852, granting lands to defendant, and accepted by it, provides that it shall "pay into the treasury of the state a sum of money equal to the amount of state tax on other real and personal property of like value for that year, upon the actual value of the road-bed * * * and other property of said company," etc. Held, that this act in no way affects defendant's charter exemption from taxation for county purposes.

2. A tax levied to pay the bonds of the county, given by it for stock in a railroad company, is a county tax: and this, though the bonds can only be paid out of the tax levied for that special purpose.

3. Though Act Mo. March 23, 1868, known as the "Township Aid Act," has by this court been held to be unconstitutional, yet, as the federal courts uphold the act, bonds issued under it are proper subjects of compromise, and a tax levied to pay such compromise bonds issued under 2 Rev. St. Mo. 1879, p. 848, is valid.

4. A local tax levied only on property within the limits of a particular township to pay township funding bonds is not a "county tax," within the meaning of defendant's charter, (Acts Mo. 1847, p. 157,) which exempts it "from state and county taxes."

5. Under Rev. St. Mo. 1879, §§ 6871, 6873, which make it the duty of the state board of equalization, after assessing a railroad in its entire length, to apportion the aggregate value to each county according to the ratio which the number of miles in each county bears to the whole number of miles in the state, an assessment of a railroad by a county court for state, county, township, and school taxes need not describe the property other than as so many miles of road of a given value; and a petition in a suit to recover these delinquent taxes, which sets forth the number of miles of road owned by defendant in a designated county, is sufficient, as it need not be more specific than the assessment, though the form for a petition prescribed by section 6889 contemplates a description of the road.

6. Neither need the petition state the number of miles of road owned by defendant in a designated township, where it states the amount of the railroad tax levied against defendant in that township; nor, so far as the validity of the township tax is concerned, is it a matter of any importance whether or not the county had adopted township organization.

7. An order of the county court levying township taxes for prior years, which recites that special taxes to pay the bonds of a designated township had been omitted for those years, and which then orders the clerk of the county court to extend the taxes on defendant's property in said township at a certain rate, "said rate being the same as extended upon other property in said township for said years," is a sufficient levy of the tax, as well as prima facie evidence both that the taxes for the designated years had been omitted, and that the rate for those years was the same as that levied on defendant's property.

8. Where the county court opens a regular term, and adjourns from day to day, or for a number of days, the adjournments are a part of the regular term, within the meaning of Rev. St. Mo. 1879, § 6879, which provides that taxes against railroad property are to be levied "at a regular term of said court, if in session at the time."

9. A levy of a tax by the county court to pay township funding bonds gives rise to a presumption that a preliminary order had been previously obtained from the circuit court directing the county court to levy the tax, as provided by Rev. St. 1879, § 6799.

On motion for rehearing. Former opinion, 11 S. W. Rep. 746.

Strong & Mossman, for appellant. B. R. Dysart, John F. Mitchell, and Sears & Guthrie, for respondent.

BLACK, J.

This is a suit by the collector of Macon county, in the name of the state, to recover state, county, school, municipal, and township taxes for various years. The defendant made a tender of the amount it believed to be due for state, school, and city and town taxes, which was accepted as to the school taxes; and the court found the amount tendered for state, city, and town taxes to be the amount due. The tender was deposited with the clerk of the circuit court. The plaintiff impliedly conceded that the judgment is erroneous in so far as he recovered what are called "Missouri & Mississippi Railroad Taxes" for the years 1868, '69, and '70; so that the taxes still in dispute are taxes of the last-named description for the years 1871, '72, '77, '78, '79, '80, '82, '83, '84, and '85, amounting to about $3,000; and what are called "Omaha Railroad Taxes," levied in Hudson township, for the years 1882 to 1885, both inclusive, amounting to $680. These taxes were all levied on the assessed value of the defendant's property, as made out and certified to the county court by the state board of assessment and equalization of railroad property. The following admissions were made on the trial of this case: That the Missouri & Mississippi Railroad tax, mentioned in the petition, was a tax levied for the purpose of paying the interest and principal of certain bonds issued by the county court of Macon county. That said county, in the year 1867, subscribed for 175 shares of the capital stock of the Missouri & Mississippi Railroad Company, and in 1870 said court again subscribed for 175 shares of the capital stock of said company; and that said bonds were issued by said county in order to pay for the stock of said company issued by said county; and that said county became a stockholder in said company, and took part in the meetings and deliberations of the shareholders as such. That the tax described in the petition as the "Omaha Railroad Tax," assessed and levied in Hudson township, was a tax for the purpose of paying the principal and interest on bonds of said county issued by the county court, in pursuance of an act approved March 23, 1868. That under said act the county court had been petitioned by the tax-payers to order an election in relation to subscribing for the stock of the St. Louis & Omaha Air Line Railroad, a corporation organized under the general laws of this state. That an election had been held, and the county court had subscribed $40,000 of bonds in the name of Hudson township. That the bonds which the tax is levied to pay are funding bonds to take up the above-named bonds; said funding bonds being issued under the general statutes of this state.

1. It is deemed best to notice here some preliminary questions. The defendant insists that the circuit court should have sustained its objection to the introduction of any evidence, because the petition is defective, in this: that it gives no sufficient description of the defendant's property; and in this: that it is not stated that Macon county had adopted township organization, or that there was such a township as Hudson township. There are four counts in the petition, but it will be sufficient to notice the first. It is alleged that defendant was the owner of "thirty-one and 15-100 miles of railroad bed, including side tracks, buildings, and other property in said Macon county of the total value," etc.; "that there were legally assessed and levied against said property for 1884, for state, school, municipal, and other purposes, the aggregate sum of $3,485.97; that the taxes so assessed and levied thereon are now due and unpaid, * * * for Omaha Railroad taxes, levied and assessed in Hudson township, in said Macon county, the sum of $161.32," etc. Section 6889, Rev. St. 1879, gives a form of petitions in these tax-suits, and the form contemplates a description of the taxed property. But, in determining what will be a sufficient description, we must look to other sections of the same law. It is made the duty of the state board of equalization to assess the railroad in its entire length, including branches, double and side tracks, depots, water-tanks, turn-tables, engines, and cars, and to apportion the aggregate value to each county, township, city, or incorporated town according to the ratio which the number of miles in such county, township, city, or incorporated town bears to the whole length of the road in this state.¹ It is apparent that the assessment in each county must be according to the apportioned mileage; and the law contemplates that the property which comes within the jurisdiction of the state board of equalization will be assessed by designating the number of miles of road in each county, township, and municipal corporation. The assessment need not, therefore, describe the property otherwise than as so many miles, of a given value, with the proper proportion of the value of the rolling stock added. The petition need be no more specific than the assessment; and it follows that the description of the property given in the petition in this case is sufficient, for it sets out the number of miles of road in Macon county, with the assessed value of road and rolling stock. It is true that the number of miles in Hudson township is not stated in the petition, though it is in the assessment; nor does the statutory form of the petition require such a statement. The petition does state the amount of the railroad tax levied in Hudson township on defendant's property; and that is sufficient. So far as the validity of this township bond tax is concerned, it is a matter of no importance whether Macon county had or had not adopted township organization.

2. On behalf of the defendant, it is next insisted that the judgment of the...