Gambar halaman

Legislative History.

See section 17, ante. Prior to the Constitution of 1879, there were two statutes providing for the fixing of transportation chargesnamely, the act of April 3, 1876 (Stats. 1875-76, p. 783), and the act of April 1, 1878 (Stats. 1877-78, p. 969).

Section Cited.

Moran v. Ross, 79 Cal. 163, 21 Pac. 547; Robinson v. S. P. R. R. Co., 105 Cal. 544, 38 Pac. 94, 722; Board of Railroad Commrs. v. Market St. Ry. Co., 132 Cal. 678, 64 Pac. 1065; Edson v. S. P. Co., 133 Cal. 26, 27, 28, 65 Pac. 15.



Railroad Commissioners.- This section should be construed to extend the supervision of the commission to all persons engaged in the business of transportation, whether as corporation, joint-stock com: panies, partnerships, or individuals. (Moran v. Ross, 79 Cal. 159, 23 Pac. 547.)

This section did not repeal section 490 of the Civil Code, although that section refers to section 489 of the same code, which superseded by this section. (Robinson v. Southern Pac. R. R. Co., 105 Cal. 526, 38 Pac, 94, 722.)

A statute may authorize the appointment of commissioners to determine the duties and obligations of railroad companies. (Portland R. R. Co. v. Railway Co., 46 Me. 69.)

The commission has no jurisdiction over a street railroad corporation operated in a municipality. (Board of Railroad Commrs. v. Market St. Ry. Co., 132 Cal. 677, 64 Pac. 1065.)

The commission has no jurisdiction, upon a complaint that a rail. roal company lowered its passenger rates in order to compete with another road, and afterward raised them without the consent of the commission, to require a restoration of the lower rate. (Edson v. Southern Pac. Co., 133 Cal. 25, 65 Pac. 15.)


Sec. 23, Art. XII. Until the legislature shall district the state, the following shall be the railroad districts: The first district shall be composed of the counties of Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, Del Norte, El Dorado, Humboldt, Lake, Lassen, Mendocino, Modoc, Napa, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento, Shasta, Sierra, Siskivou, Solano, Sonoma, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity, Yolo, and Yuba, from which one railroad commissioner shall be elected. The second district shall be composed of the counties of Marin, San Francisco, and San Jateo, from which one railroad commissioner shall be elected. The third district shall be composed of the counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Fresno, Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, Mariposa, Merced, Mono, Monterey, San Benito, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Stanislaus, Tulare, Tuolumne, and Ventura, from which one railroad commissioner shall be elected.

Legislative History.

See section 17, ante. The legislature has not districted the state, and the railroad districts remain as above.


Sec. 24, Art. XII. The legislature shall pass all laws necessary for the enforcement of the provisions of this article.

Legislative History

This section was adopted without debate and has not been cited or construed. The Constitution continued in force all laws not inconsistent therewith (section 1, article XXII). This provision continued in force the corporation law enacted prior to the Constitution and not inconsistent with it. Such laws and the corporation laws enacted since the adoption of the Constitution follow herein. For the enforcement of the provisions relative to railroads and other transportation charges the legislature enacted April 15, 1880, “An aet to organize and define the powers of the board of railroad commissioners," for which see Appendix, post.


1. Property subject to taxation. $ 14. Exemption of church property.

4. Deduction of value of securities from value of property af


$ 10. Assessment of railroads.


. 1, Art. XIII. All property in the state, not exempt under the laws of the United States shall be taxed in proportion

to its value, to be ascertained as provided by law. The word “property,” as used in this article and section, is hereby declared to include moneys, credits, bonds, stocks, dues, franchises, and all other matters and things, real, personal, and mixed, capable of private ownership; provided, that property used for free public libraries and free museums, growing crops, property used exclusively for public schools, and such as may belong to the United States, this state, or to any county or municipal corporation within this state, shall be exempt from taxation. The legislature may provide, except in case of credits secured by mortgage or trust deed, for a deduction from credits of debts due to bona fide residents of this state, [Amendment adopted November 6, 1894.]

For exemption of church property, see section 112 of this article, post.

Legislative History.

The words “property used for free public libraries and free museums” were added by the amendment of 1894. The parallel provision in the Constitution of 1849 is section 13 of article XI, as follows: “Sec. 13. • Taxation shall be equal and uniform throughout the state. All property in this state shall be taxed in proportion to its value, to be ascertained as directed by law; but assessors and collectors of town, county, and state taxes shall be elected by the qualified electors of the district, county, or town in which the property taxed for state, county, or town purposes is situated.”

Section Cited.

The following citations of the section relate to corporations: Burke v. Badlam, Cal. 600; S. V. W. W. v. Schottler, 62 Cal. 108; Security Sav. Bank v. Hinton, 97 Cal. 220, 32 Pac. 3; Farmers' etc. Bank v. Board of Equalization, 97 Cal. 324, 32 Pac, 312; Mackay 1. S. F., 113 Cal. 397, 45 Pac. 696; McHenry v. Downer, 116 Cal. 23, 47 Pac. 779; Germania Trust Co. v. San Francisco, 128 Cal. 592, 61 Pac. 178; Estate of Fair, 128 Cal. 612, 61 Pac. 184; San Francisco v. La Societe etc., 131 Cal. 613, 63 Pac. 1016.


Property.- Bonds of foreign corporations are assessable in the state of the owner's domicile. (Estate of Fair, 128 Cal. 607, 61 Pac. 184; Mackay v. San Francisco, 128 Cal. 678, 61 Pac. 382.)

A seat in a stock exchange board is not taxable property. (San Francisco v. Anderson, 103 Cal. 69, 42 Am. St. Rep. 98, 36 Pac.

A mere right of way for a pipe-line of a water company, entirely unconnected with any privilege to take tolls, is not a franchise. (Spring Valley W. W. v. Barber, 99 Cal. 36, 33 Pac. 735.)

Stock of a California corporation, whose tangible property is situated in another state, is taxable in this state in the possession of a resident of this state. (San Francisco v. Flood, 64 Cal. 504, 2 Pac. 264; San Francisco v. Fry, 63 Cal. 470.)

A franchise to collect rates for water is taxable under this section, (Spring Valley W. W. v. Schottler, 62 Cal. 69.)

The franchise of a railroad company is property subject to taxation and is not exempt by reason of its being a means or instrument employed by Congress to carry into operation the powers of the general government. (Central Pac. R. R. Co. v. Board of Equalization, 60 Cal. 35.)

The capital or capital stock of a corporation is taxable against the corporation. (San Francisco v. Spring Valley W. W., 54 Cal. 571.)

A municipal corporation has no power to impose a license tax upon a railroad company engaged in interstate commerce, and the mere fact that the tax is imposed on a branch line does not render the tax valid, where the branch is a part of the transcontinental line. (San Bernardino v. Southern Pac. Co., 107 Cal. 524, 40 Pac. 796.)

The word "property" is used in its ordinary and popular sense, and includes not only visible and tangible property, but also choses in action, such as solvent debts secured by mortgage. (People v. Eddy, 43 Cal. 331, 13 Am. Rep. 143; Lick v. Austin, 43 Cal. 590; Savings etc. Soc. v. Austin, 46 Cal. 415; People v. Ashbury, 46 Cal. 523; San Francisco v. La Societe etc., 131 Cal. 612, 63 Pac. 1016. But see Bank of Mendocino v. Chalfant, 51 Cal. 369, 471; People v. Hibernia Bank, 51 Cal. 243, 21 Am. Rep. 704.)

This is true although the debts are secured by pledge of property exempt from taxation. (Security Sav. Bank v. San Francisco, 132 Cal. 599, 64 Pac. 898.)

Bonds owned by a foreign insurance company doing business in this state and deposited with a banker in pursuance to law are taxable. (People v. Home Ins. Co., 29 Cal. 533.)

The word “franchise” as used in this section embraces all franchises whether vested in individuals or bodies politic. A franchise conferred on an individual to lay down pipes in the streets of a city and to collect rates for water furnished a city is to be taxed in the same way as when vested in corporations. (S. V. W. W. v. Schottler, 62 Cal. 108.)

The value of a franchise of a corporation is properly fixed by taking the value of all tangible property of the corporation from the market value of the capital stock. (Spring Valley W. W. v. Schottler, 62 Cal. 69; S. J. Gas Co. v. January, 57 Cal. 614.)

Railroad bonds, which are held in this state by the owner, have their situs here, and are taxable in this state, notwithstanding they are secured by mortgage of railroad property situated out of the state. (Mackay v. City and County of San Francisco, 113 Cal. 392, 45 Pac. 696.)

Loans or solvent credits secured by pledges of nontaxable stocks and bonds are taxable within the meaning of this section. (City and County of San Francisco v. La Societe etc., 131 Cal. 612, 63 Pac. 1016.)

While the franchise of a foreign corporation, engaged in business in California, “to be” a corporation was not taxable as a franchise, still the corporation's franchise “to do business" here was taxable. (London etc. Bank v. Block, 117 Fed. 900.)

Under article XII, section 15, of the Constitution, a foreign corporation's right to do business in this state is taxable. (London etc. Bank v. Block, 117 Fed. 900.)

Credits arising out of the property and business of a foreign corporation doing business in this state are taxable here. (London etc. Bank v. Block, 117 Fed. 900.)

The state franchise of the Central Pacific Railroad Company is separable from its federal franchise, and is taxable. (Central Pacific R. R. Co. v. People of State of Nevada, 162 U. S. 91, 16 Sup. (t. Rep. 885.)

This section applies to and includes rolling stock used partly in the state, but belonging to a corporation of another state whose property is operated under a lease. (Reinhart v. McDonald, 76 Fel. 403.)

Federal Franchises and Agencies.- A railroad corporation cannot claim an exemption of its property lying within the state from state taxation, because the corporation has been subsequently employed by the federal government in the carriage of mails, munitions of war, etc. (People v. Central Pac. R. R. Co., 43 Cal. 398.)

A railroad company organized under the laws of this state to construct and operate a railroad in this state, which has subsequently received from the United States a franchise for the same purpose, may be assessed upon its franchise derived from the state. (People v. Central Pac. R. R. Co., 105 Cal. 576, 38 Pac. 905; Colusa v. Glenn, 124 Cal. 498, 57 Pac. 477. But see People v. Central Pac. R. R. Co., 83 Cal. 393, 23 Pac. 303.)

A county ordinance imposing a license upon the Southern Pacific Railroad Company for carrying persons and freight for hire by ineans of railroad cars in the county, is void as a tax upon the use of the franchiso granted by the United States government. Both the franchise and the use of it are beyond the taxing power of the state. (San Benito Co. v. Southern Pac. R. R. Co., 77 Cal. 318, 19 Pac. 827.)

[ocr errors]
« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »