« AnteriorContinuar »
Opinion of the Court.
erly dampened, is printing within the meaning of the statute, and therefore this paper, being used for that purpose, is “printing paper.” We, however, think it is perfectly clear that this process is not printing, and that the use of this kind of paper, which is in controversy here, for that purpose, does not make it “printing paper.”
The words of the statute, “paper, sized or glued, suitable only for printing paper,” and “printing, unsized, used for books and newspapers, exclusively,” evidently have reference to the various kinds of paper which are used for printing by means of type or plates, which make an impression only upon the face of the paper presented to them, and not to these kinds of tissue paper, so characterized on account of their thinness, used for the purpose of transferring writing by the penetration or soaking through of the liquid used therefor, so that the copy is read upon the side of the paper opposite to that presented to the original writing. The words of the statute cannot comprehend this species of tissue paper, which is merely used for the multiplication or copying of letters or other writings. Not being included within the true meaning of these phrases above quoted, it must then belong to that other and larger class of “all other paper not otherwise provided for.” This is taxable at the rate of thirty-five per centum ad valorem, the amount which was actually levied and collected in this case.
We think the charge of the Circuit Judge on this subject, in connection with the testimony, was sound, and that it cannot be made much clearer by amplification. The judgment of the Circuit Court is therefore
Statement of the Case.
MARYE v. BALTIMORE AND OHIO RAILROAD
APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR
THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA.
No. 223. Argued and submitted April 12, 1888. – Decided April 23, 1888.
While it is quite competent for the State of Virginia to impose upon the
movable personal property of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company, (a corporation organized under the laws of Maryland,) which is brought within its territory and there habitually used and employed, the same rate of taxation which is imposed. upon similar property used in like way by its own citizens, it has not done so in the taxing laws of the
State which were in force when the tax in controversy was imposed. The statutes of Virginia relied upon by the plaintiff in error are not
applicable to the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company, but are confined to corporations which derive their authority from the laws of Virginia.
This was a bill in equity filed by the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company against the taxing officer of the State of Virginia, for the purpose of enjoining him from selling certain engines and cars, the property of the complainant, for the payment of a tax alleged to have been illegally assessed thereon. There was a decree in the Circuit Court granting the relief prayed for, from which this appeal was prosecuted.
The material facts in the case were these: The Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company is a corporation organized under the laws of Maryland, and a citizen thereof, by virtue of whose charter its rolling stock is exempt from taxation. The line of its road does not at any point lie in the State of Virginia. It, however, connects with certain roads belonging to corporations incorporated by various acts of the legislature of Virginia, to wit: the Winchester and Potomac Railroad, the Winchester and Strasburg Railroad, and the Strasburg and Harrisonburg Railroad, the last named being a part of the old Manassas Gap Railroad; and during a portion of the time embraced in the period for which the taxes in question were levied it worked the Valley Railroad from Harrisonburg to
Statement of the Case.
Staunton. All of these roads were operated by the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company by virtue of leases or contracts, which company for that purpose furnished and used its own rolling stock, consisting of engines and cars. None of the Virginia corporations owning either of these roads was the owner of any rolling stock. The manner in which this rolling stock was employed for this purpose was thus described : “There is no such rolling stock assigned permanently to the four lines above named, or either of them, in the State of Virginia. The trains in which the rolling stock is used on the four lines above named now start from Lexington, Virginia, and pass through the State of Virginia, over the four lines of railroad above named, into the State of West Virginia, and thence into the State of Maryland to the city of Baltimore, or if any of the cars are destined to western points, thence from Harper's Ferry to the West, but the trains in which the cars are hauled are run solid from Lexington, Virginia, (and formerly before the road was completed to Lexington from Staunton, Virginia,) to Baltimore. None of the rolling stock is assigned permanently to service in the State of Virginia, nor is any of the rolling stock set apart to the four lines in that State, or to the four valley lines above mentioned at all; but such rolling stock is used interchangeably upon the main line and branches of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad in the States of Maryland and Virginia, and indeed, also, upon the divisions of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad in Pennsylvania, and in States west of the Ohio River, just as the necessities of the service of the company require. Sometimes this rolling stock will be found on the main line, sometimes on the Pittsburg division, and sometimes on the trans-Ohio divisions, and there is none of it that is permanently set apart for use upon the four valley lines in Virginia above described.”
The several Virginia corporations owning these four railroads, respectively, made their annual reports to the auditor of public accounts as required by law, and were by the board of public works duly assessed on their roadways, tracks, depots, and other real estate owned by them. No tax was assessed or levied as against them on account of any rolling stock,
Statement of the Case.
because they were not reported to be the owners of any. In the month of June, 1883, the auditor of public accounts for the State of Virginia assessed the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company for taxes on its rolling stock used on these roads for the years from 1870 to 1881, inclusive, amounting in the aggregate for eleven years to the sum of $22,249.25, and placed the assessment in the hands of the treasurer of Augusta County, Virginia, for collection. This officer was proceeding to collect these taxes by a distraint of the rolling stock in question, the property of the complainant, when his proceedings were arrested by the injunction of the Circuit Court, afterward made perpetual by its final decree.
The act of the General Assembly of the State of Virginia, under which the assessment and collection of these taxes were sought to be justified, is contained in $ 20, c. 119, of the acts of the Virginia legislature, session of 1881-1882, being part of the taxing laws of the State originally enacted in 1870 and 1871, and continued with arnendments to the present time. The material part of the acü applicable to this case was as follows:
“19. Every railroad and canal company not exempted from taxation by virtue of its charter shall report annually on the first day of June, to the auditor of public accounts, all of its real and personal property of every description as of the first -day of February of each year, showing particularly in what county or corporation such property is located, and classifying the same under the following heads :
“First. Roadway and track, or canal bed.
“Second. Depots, depot grounds and lots, station buildings and fixtures and machine shops.
“Third. Real estate not included in other classes.
“Fourth. Rolling stock, including passenger, freight, cattle, or stock; baggage, mail, express, sleeping, palace, and all other cars owned by or belonging to the company; boats, machinery, and equipments; houses and appurtenances occupied by lockgate keepers and other employés.
* Fifth. ' Stores.
Statement of the Case.
“Seventh. Miscellaneous property.
Every such company shall report, on or before the first day of June of each year, the gross and net receipts of the road or canal for the twelve months preceding the first day of February of each year, and in all cases the report shall be so made as to give the data on which the same is made. If such road or canal is only in part within the Commonwealth, the report shall show what part is within the Commonwealth and what proportion the same bears to the entire length of the road or canal, and shall apportion the receipts accordingly. The reports herein required shall be verified by the oath of the president or other proper officer. Upon the receipt of every such report it shall be the duty of the auditor of public accounts to lay the same before the board of public works, who shall, after thirty days' notice previously given to the president, treasurer, or other proper officer, proceed to ascertain and assess the value of the property so reported, upon the best and most reliable information that can be procured ; and to this end shall be authorized and empowered to send for persons and papers should it be deemed necessary. A certified copy of the assessment, when made, shall be immediately forwarded by the secretary of the board to the president or other proper officer of every railroad or canal company so assessed, whose duty it shall be to pay into the treasury of the State, within sixty days after the receipt thereof, the tax which may be imposed thereon by law. A company failing to make such report, or to pay the tax assessed upon its property, shall be immediately assessed, under the direction of the auditor of the public accounts, by any, person appointed by him for the purpose, rating their real estate and rolling stock at twenty thousand dollars per mile; and a tax shall at once be levied on such value at the annual rate levied upon the value of the other property for the year. Such tax so levied, as well as the sum required to be paid upon the report hereinbefore mentioned, if the same be not paid at the time provided herein, shall be collected by the treasurer of some county in which such company owns property, to whom the auditor may deliver the assessment or a copy thereof. The treasurer