the counties. 12 Under the revenue law of Missouri, not only the original, but also the subsequently acquired capital stock of a private corporation, is liable to taxation. 13 The rolling stock of a railway company existing under the laws of another state, but used over a portion of the road extending into Iowa, is liable to taxation in the latter state. 14 A part of the public lands granted by congress to aid the construction of a railroad, is not liable to state taxation, until the company has complied with the conditions of the grant, and has become entitled to a patent. 15 Town lots, over which a railroad company has the right of way, may be taxed as right of way, but this precludes them from being also taxed as town or city lots.16 Slack-water companies are included as liable to a tax on "transportation" companies.17 And property devised to a corporation is liable to a tax imposed by statute on property of any decedent which passes to any person other than " specified relatives.18 By virtue of the right to tax the franchises of corporations, 19 the gross receipts may be resorted to as the measure of probable value.20 And a state tax imposed on the gross receipts of a railroad, telegraph, or express company, is not void as being a tax on commerce between the states, though such receipts are principally made up from freights, or from the transmission of messages pertaining to such commerce.21 If the charter provides a specific mode of taxation, this excludes all other modes.22 66 1 Provident Institution v. Massachusetts, 6 Wall. 611; Thomason v. Parif. R. R. Co. 9 id. 579; Reading R. R. Co. v. Penn'a 15 id. 284; Portland Bank v. Apthorp, 12 Mass. 252; Boston etc. R. R. Co. v. Commonw. 100 Mass. 399. 2 State v. Cumberland etc. R. R. Co. 40 Md. 22. 3 Chicago etc. R. R. Co. v. Supervisors of Boone, 44 Пll. 240; State v. Cumberland etc. R. R. Co. 40 Md. 22; and see Chesire v. Commissioners etc. 118 Mass. 386; Mayor etc. v. Stonewall Ins. Co. 53 Ala. 570; People v. Whyler, 41 Cal. 351; Emery v. Gas Company, 28 id. 345. 4 State Railroad Tax Cases, 92 U. S. 575. 5 See Coite v. Soc. for Savings, 32 Conn. 173; Cumberland etc. Railway r. Portland, 37 Me. 444; People v. Assessors etc. 33 N. Y. 81; St. Louis etc. Life Ins. Co. 47 Mo. 462; Chicago etc. R. R. Co. v. Paddock, 75 Ill. 616; Cincinnati etc. Co. v. State, 18 Ohio St. 237; Commissioners etc. v. Citizens' Nat. Bank, 23 Minn. 280; Reg. v. Leith, 1 El. & B. 121. 6 Huntington v. Ceut. Pacif. R. R. Co. 2 Sawyer, 503; and see Tax Cases, 12 Gill & J. 117; Albany etc. R. R. Co. v. Town of Canaan, 16 Barb. 244. 7 Louisville etc. R. R. v. State, 8 Heisk. 663; see also Illinois v. Ill. Cent. R. R. Co. 27 Ill. 64. 8 Providence etc. R. R. Co. v. Wright, 2 R. I. 459; and see Goodell Manuf. Co. v. Trask, 11 Pick. 513; Salem Iron Factory Co. v. Inhabitants etc. 10 Mass. 514; State v. Metz, 31 N. J. L. 378; Filchburg R. R. Co. v. Prescott, 47 N. H. 62. 9 People v. Barker, 48 N. Y. 70. 10 See Sherwood v. Saratoga etc. R. R. Co. 15 Barb. 650; People v. Beardsley, 52 id. 105; Glovie v. So. Car. R. R. Co. 1 Strob. 70. 11 Buffalo etc. R. R. Co. v. Supervisors etc. 48 N. Y. 93. 13 St. Louis etc. Life Ins. Co. v. Charles, 47 Mo. 462. 14 Dubuquer. Ill. etc. R. R. Co. 39 Iowa, 56; and see Pittsburgh etc. R. R. Co. v. Commonwealth, 66 Pa. St. 73; Minot v. Phila. etc. R. R. Co. 18 Wall. 206; 2 Abb. U. S. 323. 15 Cent. Pacif. R. R. Co. v. Howard, 51 Cal. 229; compare Tucker v. Ferguson, 22 Wall. 527. 16 Chicago etc. R. K. Co. v. Miller, 72 III. 144. 17 Commonw. v. Monongahela Nav. Co. 66 Pa. St. 81. 18 Miller v. Commonw. 27 Gratt. 110. 19 See Richmond etc. R. R. Co. v. Brogden, 74 No. Car. 707. 20 Reading R. R. Co. v. Peun'a, 15 Wall. 284; see People v. Mayor of Brooklyn, 6 Barb. 209. 21 Reading R. R. Co. v. Penn'a, 15 Wall. 284; Southern Express Co. v. Hood, 15 Rich. 66; Walcott r. People, 17 Mich. 68; West. Un. Tel. Co. v. Mayer. 28 Ohio St. 531; and see Ins. Co. v. Commonw. 87 Pa. St. 173; 30 Am. R. 352. 22 New York etc. R. R. Co. v. Sabin, 26 Pa. St. 242. 3 § 90. Exemption from liability to taxation.Unless the constitution of a state forbids it, the legislature has the power to grant a corporation an exemption from taxation; 2 but such a grant, to be operative, must be expressed in clear and unquestionable terms, and the language of the grant should be strictly construed against the party to be benefited thereby; unless an equivalent for the taxes exempted is by the same statute required to be paid by the corporation, in which case, it should be liberally construed in favor of the corporation. An exemption from taxation conferred by charter forms a part of the contract between the state and the corporation, which cannot be impaired by future legislatures; 5 but an exemption from taxation not forming a part of such con tract may be repealed. exempting corporate property from taxation is not a "contract" which exempts it, unless there be a consideration for the act.7 An exemption granted in general terms presumably remits only state taxes, and does not preclude taxes for municipal purposes. An exemption from taxation for "municipal purposes" does not preclude a tax for school purposes. So, an exemption from "public taxes" generally operates only to remit taxes pertaining to the public revenue, and does not extend to local municipal taxes.10 An exemption "from taxation of every kind," in the charter of a hospital, does not inIclude special assessments against the property for the improvement of the street on which it fronts.11 An exemption from taxation of all property "suitable and proper for carrying into execution the powers granted," leaves the courts to determine the question of necessity in each given case.12 A charter providing for the payment of a certain sum by the corporation, and then enacting "that no further or other tax or impost shall be levied or assessed upon said company," exempts the company generally from all taxes for county or other purposes than those stated in the charter. 18 A statute exempting all the property of a railroad company from taxation includes its franchise; 14 but not property held by the corporation as a mere convenience; 15 or lands which the corporation holds for sale.16 A constitutional prohibition of an exemption of corporate property from taxation impliedly forbids the renewal of an exemption which has expired or become merged.17 The payment of a license fee, bonus, or tax, imposed upon a corporation as a condition of granting or permitting it to exercise its franchises, is not necessarily an implied prohibition of any other burden or tax to be imposed by the state.18 Nor does the assignee of the franchises of a corporation become invested with an exemption from taxes granted to the former company.19 And where corporations are con And an act of the legislature solidated, whatever property of either was previously taxable continues liable to taxation after the consolidation.20 But the consent of a corporation to a special tax, or to a particular mode of assessment, will not impair a grant of exemption from general taxes.21 1 See State v. Northern etc. R. R. Co. 44 Md. 131; City of Davenport v. Chicago etc. R. R. Co. 38 Iowa, 633; North-western University v. People, 80 Ill. 333. 2 Bank of Illinois v. People, 4 Scam. 303; Minot v. Phila. etc. R. R. Co. 13 Wall. 206; see People v. Comm'rs of Taxes, 23 N. Y. 132. 3 People v. Whyler, 41 Cal. 351; State v. Town Council, 12 Rich. 339; West Wisconsin R. R. Co. v. Supervisors. 93 U. S. 55; Northampton County r. Lehigh Coal etc. Co. 75 Pa. St. 461; Comm'rs etc. v. Brackenridge, 12 Kan. 114; Mayor etc. v. Cent. R. R. Co. 50 Ga. 620; Stater. Woodruff, 37 N. J. L. 13); Bakewell r. Police Jury, 20 La. An. 334; Hannibal etc. R. R. Co. v. Shacklett, 30 Mo. 550. 4 Milwaukee etc. R. R. Co. v. Supervisors, 29 Wis. 116; and see Daughdrill v. Ala. Life Ins. etc. Co. 31 Ala. 91; Farmers' Bank v. Commonw. 6 Bush, 127. The intention to exempt corporate property from taxation must be clear: Hoge v. Railroad Co. 99 U. S. 348. 5 Johnson v. Commonw. 7 Dana, 338; Neustadt v. Ill. Cent. R. R. Co. 31 Ill. 454; Raleigh etc. R. R. Co. v. Reid, 13 Wall. 259; Central Railroad etc. v. Georgia, 92 U. S. 665; Hewitt v. N. Y. etc. R. R. Co. 12 Blatchf. 452: Washington University v. Rouse, 8 Wall. 439; State v. Comm rs etc. 37 N. J. L. 240; Oliver v. Memphis etc. R. R. Co. 30 Ark. 123. But see Debolt v. Ohio Life Ins. Co. 1 Ohio St. 553; Brewster v. Hough, 10 N. H. 138; Sandusky Bank v. Wilbor, 7 Ohio St. 481; Mott v. Peun'a R. R. Co. 30 Pa. St. 9. 6 Lord r. Town of Litchfield, 35 Conn. 116; Louisville etc R. R. Co. v. Commouw. 10 Bush, 43; St. Louis etc. R. R. Co. v. Loftin, 30 Ark. 693. 7 Home of Friendless v. Rouse, 8 Wall. 430; Tucker v. Ferguson, 22 1d. 527; West Wiscousin R. R. Co. 93 U. S. 595. 8 Matter of Mayor etc. 11 Johns, 77; Baptist Church v. McAtee, 8 Bush, 508; Insurance Co. v. New Orleans, 1 Woods, 85. 9 Root v. Erdelineyer, 37 Ind. 225. 10 Morgan v. Cree, 45 Vt. 773; and see Taylor v. Palmer, 31 Cal. 240; Egyptian Levee Co. v. Hardin, 27 Mo. 495; Pray v. Northern Liberties, 31 Pa. St. 69; Boston etc. Soc. v. Mayor etc. 116 Mass. 181; Paine v. Spratley, 5 Kan. 525; Lafayette v. Male Orphan Asylum, 4 La. An. 1. 11 Sheehan v. Good Samaritan Hospital, 50 Mo. 155; and see Brightman v. Kirner, 22 Wis. 54; Baltimore v. Cemetery Co. 7 Md. 517; Emiery v. Gas Co. 23 Cal. 345; Harlem Presbyterian Church v. Mayor etc. 5 Hun, 442; Paterson v. Society etc. 4 Zab. 385; Matter of College Street, 8 R. I. 474; Bridgeport v. N. Y. etc. R. R. Co. 36 Conn. 255. 12 State v. Woodruff. 36 N. J. L. 94; and see Balt. etc. R. R. Co. v. Supervisors etc. 3 W. Va. 320. 13 Camden etc. R. R. Co. v. Hillegas, 3 Har. (Del.) 11; and see State v. Minton, 3 Zab. 529. 14 Wilmington R. R. v. Reid, 13 Wall. 264. 15 Lackawanna Iron Co. v. Luzerne County, 42 Pa. St. 424; Gardner v. State, I N. J. 557; Inhabitants of Worcester v. Western Railw. Co. 4 Met. 564; Railroad Co. v. Berks County, 6 Pa. St. 70: State v. Comm'rs of Mausfield, 3 Zab. 510; and see People v. Cemetery Co. 86 Ill. 336; 29 Am. R. 32. 16 Illinois etc. R. R. Co. v. Irwin, 72 Ill. 452; Richmond etc. R. R. Co. r. Comm'rs, 76 N. C. 212; State v. Hancock, 35 N. J. L. 537; Milwaukee etc. R. R. Co. r. Milwaukee, 34 Wis. 271; Ordinary etc. v. Central R. R. Co. 40 Ga. 646; Mobile etc. R. R. Co. r. Moseley, 52 Miss. 127; Tucker v. Ferguson, 22 Wall. 527; and see Portland etc. R. R. Co. v. Saco, 60 Me. 197. 17 Trask r. Maguire, 18 Wall. 391. 18 Union etc. Railw. Co. v. Philadelphia, 83 Pa. St. 429; Erie Railw. Co. v. Commonw. 66 id. 84; 5 Am. R. 351; Minot v. Phila. etc. R. R. Co. 2 Abb. N. S. 323; 18 Wall. 206; New Orleans v. People's Ins. Co. 27 La. An. 519; Louisville etc. R. R. Co. v. Commonw. 10 Bush, 43. 19 Evansville R. R. Co. v. Commonw. 9 Bush. 438; Morgan v. Louisiana, 93 U. S. 217; and see Stevens v. N. Y. etc. R. R. Co. 13 Blatchf. 104. Compare Atlantic etc. R. R. Co. v. Allen, 15 Fla. 637. 20 Chesapeake etc. R. R. Co. v. Virginia, 94 U. S. 718. 21 State v. Commissioner etc. 37 N. J. L. 240. Exemption of a cor poration from taxation is not a corporate franchise: State v. Maine Cent. R. R. Co. 66 Me. 488. |