Pennsylvania Railroad v. Pittsburg

70 A. 271, 221 Pa. 90, 1908 Pa. LEXIS 441
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided May 4, 1908·No. Appeal, Nos. 216 and 217·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Potter,

The plaintiffs (appellants) are owners of certain strips of land in the city of Pittsburg, used now and for many years heretofore for their main railroad and tracks, and commonly known as rights of way. The city of Pittsburg, in 1907, assessed and levied a tax upon the said strips, claiming authority to do so under the special Act of January 4, 1859, P. L. 828, which provides that “ all real estate situated in said city owned or possessed by any railroad company shall be, and is hereby, made subject to taxation for city purposes the same as other real estate in said city.”

[93] The first question that is raised is whether these rights of way are real estate taxable under the act of 1859. That they are in fact real estate under the general legal distinctions of property is not disputed, but it is not clear that they are such real estate as comes within the intent of the authority to tax, given by that act. The original conception of a railroad was that of an improved highway, the right to construct which was a franchise to the company, involving the obligation to furnish motive power for persons and property to all who sought it, even in their own vehicles. Of course, experience soon demonstrated that as vehicles could not pass each other as on ordinary roads, they as well as the motive power must be under the control of one authority, but the conception of the railroad as a public highway has never been changed. As such, it is a franchise not included under general words authorizing taxation of property, real or personal.

No case has been cited which sustains the view adopted by the learned court below. In Penna. Railroad Company v. Pittsburg, 104 Pa. 522, where the act of 1859 was under consideration, it was held that the real estate of the railroad used l'or offices, passenger and freight stations, etc., although necessary conveniences for the enjoyment of the franchise, were taxable under the act. But the distinction is plain. Depots, stations, offices, etc., are necessary, but depots, etc., in any particular place are matters of convenience only, while the right of way is essential to the life of the franchise itself, and having once been located is no longer open to the general authority to change.

Not only has no case been found to support the view of the court below that the rights of way should be included with other real estate subject to taxation, but the contemporary construction of the statute has been uniformly the other way. The city of Pittsburg itself made no attempt to assert such a construction for nearly half a century after the passage of the act. The legislature is presumed to use language in its generally accepted meaning at the time. Contemporánea expositio fortissima est in lege, and it is perfectly clear that in 1859 the term real estate, as a subject of taxation, was not understood to include the essential instrumentalities of a franchise such as the right of way of a railroad.

[94] The second and larger question in the case is whether section 3 of the act of 1859 was repealed by the Act of March 7, 1901, P. L. 20. The case of Harrisburg v. Gas Co., 219 Pa. 76, is cited as authority for the view that it has been so repealed. There the act of 1889 was held to furnish a complete system for the government of cities of the third class, which was inconsistent with the provisions of the earlier acts, authorizing the city to levy taxes on all real estate of corporations within its limits. If we compare the act of 1889, which was involved in the Harrisburg case, with the provisions of the act of 1901, which is here involved, it will appear that the property subject to tax is identical; so are the provisions for assessment and collection of taxes; and that both acts provide for the election of assessors, — the Act of 1901, art. 6, P. L. 26, by reference to the earlier Act of July 9, 1897, P. L. 219, and also by art. 12, sec. 1, par. 7, P. L. 33. But in this respect the act of 1901 does not contain a complete system in itself, and differs from the Act of 1889, art. 15, sec. 1, P. L. 317, which contains such provisions without reference to prior legislation.

Then again, the Act of 1889, art. 15, secs. 8, 9 and 10, P. L. 319, designates the officers to whom taxes should be paid, the manner of enforcing payment, and penalties for failure to pay. The Act of 1901, art. 19, sec. 3, par. 2, P. L. 40, authorizes cities of the second class to provide for the assessment and collection of taxes, but does not designate any officer to collect, nor manner of enforcing payment, nor penalties ; but art. 7, P. L. 26, provides that “ the city treasurer shall receive the proceeds of all public loans, and shall demand and receive from the proper officers, all moneys payable to the city from whatever source, and pay all warrants duly issued and countersigned ; the receipt and collection of funds derived from assessments, taxes, water rents, licenses, permits and rents, from markets, landings, wharves and other public property, excepting delinquent taxes and water rents, shall be attached and subordinate to this department and subject to its supervision, control and direction.” It will be seen that the act of 1901 is far short of the act of 1889, in the establishment of a complete system for the assessment and collection of taxes.

Then as to delinquent taxes, the act of 1889 provides a complete system: Art. 15, sec. 11 et seq., P. L. 320. The act of [95]*951901 makes no provision as to collection of delinquent taxes except by reference to prior acts, as follows: Art. 5, sec. 1, P. L. 20 : “ The collector of delinquent taxes shall be the head of the department of delinquent taxes, and all laws and ordinances in force prior to the passage of this act, relative to said office and collection of delinquent taxes, shall be and remain in full force.”

The act of 1889 contains a complete system as to registry of “ the ownership of all real estate liable to municipal taxation or assessment: ” Article 16, P. L. 328. The act of 1901 is silent on this subject, and the local Act of February 21,1871, P. L. 126, is still in force: Safe Deposit & Trust Co. v. Fricke, 152 Pa. 231.

Numerous provisions on other subjects in the act of 1889, making it a complete system as to cities of the third class are, in the act of 1901, either omitted altogether or supplied by reference to existing laws.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Pennsylvania Railroad v. Pittsburg, 70 A. 271, 221 Pa. 90, 1908 Pa. LEXIS 441 (Pa. 1908).

70 A. 271 (Pennsylvania Railroad v. Pittsburg) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sims v. Christiana
5 Pa. D. & C.2d 359 (Schuylkill County Court of Common Pleas, 1954)
Pittsburgh Junction Railroad v. Pittsburgh
352 Pa. 317 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1945)
Pitts. Junction R. R. Co. v. Pitts.
42 A.2d 829 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1945)
In Re Petition of City of Pittsburgh
81 Pa. Super. 564 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1923)
Philadelphia v. Philadelphia & Reading Railroad
38 Pa. Super. 529 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1909)