The State ex rel. Gibson v. Davis
| Decision Date | 03 December 1895 |
| Citation | 33 S.W. 22,131 Mo. 457 |
| Parties | The State ex rel. Gibson, Collector, v. Davis et al., Appellants |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Newton Circuit Court. -- Hon. J. C. Lamson, Judge.
This is an action for delinquent taxes on certain land brought by the state at the relation of the collector of Newton county against John B. Davis, the Atlantic & Pacific Railroad Company, and the St. Louis & San Francisco Railway Company. From a judgment in favor of the plaintiff the railroad companies appeal.
Reversed and remanded.
L. F Parker for appellants.
For reasons apparent to the legislature, and which, if necessary could be given here, it has seen fit to provide a separate method for raising revenue from railroad property from that provided for a like purpose from all other kinds of property. The assessment of railroad taxes is placed in the hands of the state board (see sec. 7723, R. S. 1889); the assessment of local property of railroad companies is, it is true, vested in the county assessor, but it is expressly provided that the "taxes on all property so assessed shall be levied and collected according to the provisions of this article." R. S. 1889, sec. 7728. Upon the assessment by the state board of the railroad proper, and the assessment of the local property by the local assessor being received by the county court it is its duty to make an order levying the taxes on such property, and no tax levied against a railroad is valid unless the same is levied under such order. R. S. 1889, secs. 7731, 7732; St. Louis & San Francisco R'y Co. v. Apperson, 97 Mo. 300. Upon the making of this order by the county court it is the duty of the county clerk to extend the taxes upon railroad property on a "separate tax book, to be known as the 'railroad tax book'" (see sec. 7733, chap. 138, R. S. 1889), and no taxes, not extended upon the railroad tax book as required by the statute, can be collected from a railway company. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad v. Apperson, supra; State ex rel. Ziegenhein v. Railroad, 117 Mo. 1. It is also provided that the county clerk shall "make out and certify to the secretary or chief managing officer of such railroad company a statement of the taxes levied on the property of such company," and the statute expressly prescribes what this statement shall contain; that is to say, that it shall contain, first, a statement of the taxes on the railroad proper; and, second, a statement of the local property and its assessment, and the taxes levied thereon, "including lands." Section 7734, supra. The railroad tax book, above referred to, is then delivered to the collector, and forms his warrant for the collection of the taxes, and is the only warrant provided by the statute for the collection of taxes against railroads. There is a provision in article 6 referring to suits for taxes against individuals and corporations other than railroads, that a tax bill, duly authenticated by the collector, shall be prima facie evidence that the amount claimed is just and correct. Article 8, however, prescribes a separate and distinct mode of procedure in suits for railroad taxes; it contains a form of petition and other provisions with reference to practice in suits for delinquent taxes against railroads entirely different from those contained in article 6, and it was the evident intention of the legislature that in all matters the method of levying and collecting taxes upon railroad property should be different and distinct from that prescribed for the levy and collection of taxes on the property of individuals or corporations other than railroads. Hence it is plain that it was not the intention of the legislature that the provisions of section 7682 of article 6 should apply to the collection of taxes against railroad companies.
John B. Murray for respondent.
This is an action for taxes, delinquent for the year 1890, against the northeast quarter of the southwest quarter of section 12, township 25, range 31, Newton county, Missouri. Defendant companies by answer admit their incorporation as alleged in the petition and deny all other allegations therein contained. There was judgment rendered against all of the defendants for the amount claimed, to wit, $ 4.20. The railroad companies appealed.
Upon the trial the defendant companies objected to the introduction of any evidence because the petition stated no cause of action, and because it appeared affirmatively from the petition that the suit is based upon a certain tax bill certified from the general tax books of the county and not from a "railroad tax book," as required by law, and because it nowhere appears from the petition that the taxes sued for are included in any "railroad tax book," which objection was overruled and defendants excepted.
The same objection was interposed by defendants to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial