1. A state may tax property permanently within its jurisdiction
belonging to one domiciled elsewhere and used to carry on commerce
among the states. Where railroad property is a part of a system and
has its actual use only in connection with other parts of the
system, that fact may be considered even though other parts of the
system are outside the state. The mileage basis of apportionment
cannot be adopted in the taxation of railroad franchises where the
result is shown to be arbitrarily excessive. P.
274 U. S.
80.
2. The value of the physical elements of a railroad -- whether
that value be deemed actual cost, cost of reproduction new, cost of
reproduction less depreciation or some other figure -- is not the
sole measure of or guide to its value in operation; much weight is
to be given to present and prospective earning capacity at rates
that are reasonable, having regard to traffic available and
competitive and other conditions prevailing in the territory
served. P.
274 U. S.
81.
3. No intangible element of substantial amount over and above
the value of its physical parts inheres in a railroad that cannot
earn a reasonable rate of return on the amount attributable in
valuation to its bare bones, as the mere tangible elements properly
may be called. P.
274 U. S.
82.
4. While the mileage used as an integral part of a railroad
system may have elements of value that it otherwise would not
possess, and the state properly may have regard to the whole in
order to ascertain the value of the part that is within its
borders, it is not permissible to take into account any of the
outside property unless it can be seen in some plain and fairly
intelligible way that it adds to the value of the road and the
rights exercised in the state. P.
274 U. S.
82.
Page 274 U. S. 77
5. Facts examined and
held that the additional values
of intangible property on which taxes in question were based are
arbitrarily excessive, and include values of system property beyond
the state. P.
274 U. S.
85.
6. Record examined and cause
held reviewable on writ of
error. P.
274 U. S.
86.
204 Ky. 388 reversed.
These were proceedings by the Commonwealth instituted in a
county court for the purpose of listing for taxation intangible
property of the railway alleged to have been omitted. The first was
against the railway alone, covering the years 1914-1916. The second
sought like relief for the years 1917-1918, during which the
Director General of Railroads operated the railway system. The
proceedings, tried together throughout, were dismissed by the
county court, and by the circuit court on appeal. The judgment of
the latter was reversed in 193 Ky. 474. Judgments recovered on
resubmission to the circuit court were affirmed by the Court of
Appeals, except that, in respect of the years 1914 and 1916, the
judgment in the first case was reversed. 204 Ky. 388.
MR. JUSTICE BUTLER delivered the opinion of the Court.
A judgment against plaintiffs in error for franchise taxes
imposed under the laws of Kentucky in respect of
Page 274 U. S. 78
certain lines of railway was affirmed by the highest court of
that state. 204 Ky. 388.
And see 193 Ky. 474. Reversal is
sought on the ground that, as applied, these laws contravene the
due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The statutes
* (ยงยง 4077-4081)
provide that every foreign or domestic railway company, in addition
to other taxes imposed by law, shall pay an annual tax on its
franchise. The provisions apply whether the privilege is exercised
by the corporation in its own name or in the name of another which
it adopts. A company's railway system is deemed to include lines
operated, leased, or controlled, whether technically owned or not.
The tax is on intangible property. Where the railroad is partly
within and partly without the state, the value of the intangible
property so to be taxed may be determined substantially as follows:
capitalize the net railway operating income of the entire system
for the accounting year last ended; assign to Kentucky its mileage
proportion of that amount; deduct the assessed value of the
tangible property otherwise taxed, and the remainder is the value
taken as the basis for the franchise taxes. When the railroad is
wholly within the state, the capitalized net, less the assessed
value of tangible property on which other taxes are paid, is taken
to be the value of intangible property.
Greene v. Louis. &
Interurban R. Co., 244 U. S. 499,
244 U. S. 510,
and cases cited;
Louis. & Nash. R. Co. v. Greene,
244 U. S. 522,
244 U. S.
539.
Plaintiff in error the Southern Railway Company is a Virginia
corporation. The lines of its systems of railroads, exclusive of
the Kentucky mileage in question, exceed 9,500 miles, and extend
from Washington, D.C. into Virginia, the Carolinas, Tennessee,
Georgia, Florida, Alabama, and Mississippi. The company also has a
line from New Albany, Indiana. to East St. Louis, Illinois. It
does
Page 274 U. S. 79
not own any railroad in Kentucky. The "Southern Railway Company
in Kentucky" owns 127.63 miles, all of which are in that state. Its
branches connect with the line of the Cincinnati, New Orleans &
Texas Pacific Railway Company, which extends from Cincinnati to
Chattanooga, and connects it with the system. Its stock is owned by
the Virginia company. The same persons are officers of both. The
lines of the Kentucky company are reported to public authorities,
and are advertised as a part of the system. The Mobile & Ohio
Railroad Company, the Cumberland Railroad Company, and the
Cumberland Railway Company own, in all, about 53.3 miles of
railroad in Kentucky, but their lines are not connected with the
lines of the Southern Railway Company in Kentucky. The Virginia
company, through stock ownership, controls these companies, but
they and the Southern Railway in Kentucky, in their own names and
as owners, made reports and paid in full all taxes assessed under
Kentucky laws on their tangible and intangible properties.
The commonwealth brought this suit against the Virginia company
and the Director General to recover additional franchise or
intangible property taxes for 1918 and 1919 in respect of the
Kentucky mileage of these companies. The Court of Appeals held that
there was no such connection or unity of use between the system of
the Virginia company and the lines of the Mobile & Ohio, the
Cumberland Railroad, and the Cumberland Railway as would justify
recovery of any franchise taxes in respect of their Kentucky
mileage. Stipulated facts tended to show that the Virginia company
controlled the Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific, and the
court held that, by means of its lines, the railroad of the
Southern Railway in Kentucky was so connected with the lines of the
Virginia company as to be a part of the system. The value of
intangible property adjudged to have been omitted, and on which the
additional franchise taxes were
Page 274 U. S. 80
calculated, for 1918 was $1,730,090.02, and for 1919 was
$3,028,592.62. These amounts were arrived at as follows: the net
railway operating income for the entire system was capitalized at 7
percent; there was deducted an amount to cover the value of shops,
terminals, and double tracks outside Kentucky in excess of
corresponding tangible property connected with the lines in that
state; there was allocated to Kentucky such proportion of the
remainder as 424.61 miles, which were attributed to Kentucky, bore
to the total mileage of the system; that amount was equalized for
taxation at 75 percent for 1918 and at 85 percent for 1919, and
from the result there was deducted the values of tangible and
intangible property (including the Kentucky mileage of the
Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific) on which taxes had
been paid. But the average value per mile so deducted was less than
the system average per mile. The amounts so arrived at were
assigned to the 127.63 miles of the Southern Railway Company in
Kentucky and the 197.5 miles in Kentucky of the lines of the
Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific. The increase per mile
for 1918 was $5,334.55, and for 1919 was $9,338.34.
The Court of Appeals rightly declared that a state may tax
property permanently within its jurisdiction belonging to one
domiciled elsewhere and used to carry on commerce among the states;
that, where property is a part of a system and has its actual use
only in connection with other parts of the system, that fact may be
considered, even though other parts of the system are outside the
state; that the state may not tax property outside its jurisdiction
belonging to one domiciled elsewhere, and that the mileage basis of
apportionment cannot be adopted in the taxation of railroad
franchises where the result is shown to be arbitrarily excessive.
These propositions are derived from the decisions of this
Court.
Page 274 U. S. 81
Fargo v. Hart, 193 U. S. 490,
193 U. S. 499;
Pittsburgh, etc., Railway Co. v. Backus, 154 U.
S. 421,
154 U. S.
427-431;
Union Tank Line Co. v. Wright,
249 U. S. 275,
249 U. S. 282;
Wallace v. Hines, 253 U. S. 66,
253 U. S.
69.
The question is whether the state made valid application of the
governing principles. The value of tangible property is not
involved in this case. The demand of the commonwealth against the
plaintiffs in error was for taxes on intangible properties over and
above the amounts that had been paid by the owning companies. And
the entire amount added as a basis for additional taxes is
attributable only to the lines of the Southern Railway Company in
Kentucky. There was no claim for any taxes in respect of the lines
of the Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific. That company
had also reported its earnings and paid taxes on its tangible and
intangible properties in Kentucky. These taxes were based on values
per mile in excess of the average values per mile for the system
arrived at by capitalization of net railway operating income in
accordance with the rule applied by the state. No part of the
amounts adjudged to have been omitted could properly be assigned
thereto. The Mobile & Ohio, the Cumberland Railroad, and the
Cumberland Railway were held not to be a part of the system.
Plaintiffs in error insist that the enforcement of the taxes on
these amounts, as measuring the additional values of intangible
properties inhering in the lines of the Southern Railway Company in
Kentucky, operates to tax the property of the Virginia company
located beyond the borders of Kentucky, and that such amounts are
arbitrarily excessive.
The value of the physical elements of a railroad -- whether that
value be deemed actual cost, cost of reproduction new, cost of
reproduction, less depreciation or some other figure -- is not the
sole measure of or guide to
Page 274 U. S. 82
its value in operation.
Smyth v. Ames, 169 U.
S. 466,
169 U. S. 547.
Much weight is to be given to present and prospective earning
capacity at rates that are reasonable, having regard to traffic
available and competitive and other conditions prevailing in the
territory served. No intangible element of substantial amount over
and above the value of its physical parts inheres in a railroad
that cannot earn a reasonable rate of return on its bare bones --
as the mere tangible elements properly may be called.
See Omaha
v. Omaha Water Co., 218 U. S. 180,
218 U. S.
202.
The amount adjudged to have been omitted equals an increase on
the lines of the Southern Railway Company in Kentucky of $13,555
per mile for 1918 and of $23,730 for 1919. The 1917 average net
operating income per mile for the system was the basis for
determining the Kentucky franchise taxes for 1918, and the average
for 1918 controlled the amount of the 1919 taxes. The average for
the system was $3,642 per mile for 1917, and was $3,623 for 1918.
The corresponding net income per mile of the Southern Railway
Company in Kentucky for 1917 was $878. There was a loss of $4,741
per mile in 1918. The record also shows a loss in each of the years
1914, 1915, and 1916. The average for the five years was a loss of
$1,230 per mile per year.
If considered alone, the railroad of the Southern Railway
Company in Kentucky would be a losing venture. Its operating loss
was more than $157,000 per year for the average of the five years
reported in the record. But, assuming it a part of the system, it
is right to take into consideration the parts outside the state
that are operated in connection with it. The mileage used as an
integral part of a railroad system may have elements of value that
it otherwise would not possess, and the state properly may have
regard to the whole in order to ascertain the value of the part
that is within its borders.
Fargo v. Hart, supra,
193 U. S. 499.
But, if the method pursued in valuing property
Page 274 U. S. 83
within the state is arbitrary, and the resulting valuation is
grossly excessive, the tax must be condemned as in contravention of
the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Union Tank
Line Co. v. Wright, supra, 249 U. S. 282
and cases cited. It is not permissible for the state to take into
account any of the outside property, "unless it can be seen in some
plain and fairly intelligible way that it adds to the value of the
road and the rights exercised in the state."
Wallace v. Hines,
supra, 253 U. S.
69.
The operating results of the system, compared with those of the
Southern Railway Company in Kentucky, show that, on the basis of
valuation adopted by the state, the average value per mile of the
lines of that company is very much less than the average value per
mile of the system. If taken separately, it is clear that, because
of lack of net earnings, no substantial intangible elements of
value could reasonably be attributed to the railroad of that
company. In order to justify the increases made, there would have
to be attributed to these lines large amounts from system earnings.
To sustain the addition for 1919, it is necessary to take enough to
overcome the deficit of $4,741 per mile, plus a fair return on the
value of the physical property and on the $23,730 per mile fixed as
a basis for additional taxes. The draft on earnings from other
parts of the system to sustain the increase for 1918 would not be
so heavy. But it is equally obvious that there is no foundation for
the finding that there existed in these lines intangible values of
$1,730,090, or any other substantial amount in excess of the value
fairly to be attributed to the physical elements of the railroad.
If intangible elements were attributed to the system at the same
rate per mile as results from the distribution of the added amount
to the mileage of the Southern Railway in Kentucky, their value
would be more than $200,000,000 for 1919, and more than
$120,000,000 for 1918. Clearly there is no foundation for any such
results. The mere
Page 274 U. S. 84
statement of the figures is sufficient to show that the amount
added as a basis for franchise taxes is so excessive and
unreasonable that it cannot be sustained, and such an application
of the system earnings amounts to an attempt to tax property
outside the state. And, as the direct earnings per mile of the
lines of that company are so much less than the average for the
system, it is plain that the amount adjudged to have been omitted
was arbitrarily excessive, and included values of system property
beyond the limits of Kentucky.
Moreover, the percentages used to make the apportionment to
Kentucky were too high. Reference to the figures for 1919 will be
sufficient. There was taken 4,273 percent of $432,326,444.12, the
system value to be apportioned. The system mileage was 9,939.1, and
that used for the apportionment was 424.61. The Southern Railway
Company in Kentucky had 127.63 miles, the Cincinnati, New Orleans
& Texas Pacific, 197.5, the Mobile & Ohio, 38.693, the
Cumberland Railroad, 12.9, and the Cumberland Railway, 1.74. As the
court held that the lines of the three companies last mentioned
were not so connected with the system that plaintiffs in error were
liable in respect of them, their mileage was erroneously included
in the factor used for apportionment to the lines taxed. And, for
the reasons stated, the mileage of the Cincinnati, New Orleans
& Texas Pacific should not have been included. The mileage used
to make the apportionment was more than three times that of the
Southern Railway in Kentucky, and was more than 30 percent in
excess of the combined mileage of that company and the Cincinnati,
New Orleans & Texas Pacific. Obviously deduction of the lesser
values of the Kentucky mileage on which the owners had paid taxes
did not eliminate the error.
The enforcement of the franchise taxes so assessed would violate
the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Page 274 U. S. 85
The commonwealth asserts that, in the Kentucky courts, the
company did not make "the objection which is made here that this
was a tax on property outside the state." But the record shows the
contrary. The petition alleged that a portion of the Kentucky
franchise had been omitted from assessment, and prayed that such
portion be assessed and taxed. The answer of plaintiffs in error
not only denied liability and alleged that to hold the company
liable and to attempt to add to that assessment would be a
violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, but it also stated:
"Defendants say that the effort made herein is simply for the
purpose of endeavoring to bring into the state of Kentucky, for
purposes of taxation, property not in Kentucky, and values
appertaining to property not in Kentucky, and earnings derived from
property not in Kentucky; that to do this would be in violation of
. . . the Constitution of the United States, particularly the
Fourteenth Amendment thereof."
In its first decision (193 Ky. 474, 488), the Court of Appeals
said:
"It is our conclusion, therefore, that the court should have
assessed against defendant [Southern Railway Company of Virginia]
Kentucky's portion of its intangible property assessed by the
proportion of the mileage that the lines nominally operated by the
'Southern Railway Company in Kentucky' bear to the entire mileage
of defendant's system estimated according to the method provided by
the statute. But it is insisted that this would result in taxing in
Kentucky property having no situs here. . . ."
Then follows the court's answer to that contention. This shows
that the court distinctly recognized and passed upon the contention
that the imposition of the additional franchise taxes would be to
tax property outside Kentucky. That decision, according to the
local rule, not only bound the lower court, but controlled the
disposition of the case on the second appeal.
Hopkins v. Adam
Roth Grocery Co., 105 Ky. 357, 358. The objections
Page 274 U. S. 86
were reiterated in an amended answer filed after the first
decision. And the Court of Appeals, in its second decision,
declared that the additional assessments "were made in accordance
with, and are concluded by, the former opinion herein." Clearly the
objections made in the state courts were sufficient. They went to
the point that, as proposed to be applied and enforced, the state
statutes would operate to tax property outside and beyond the
jurisdiction of Kentucky, in contravention of the Fourteenth
Amendment. And, notwithstanding these objections, the Court of
Appeals, in its first decision, directed the making of these
additional assessments, and, in its second decision, declared that
they had been made as directed and affirmed the judgment of the
circuit court by which they were determined.
A petition for certiorari was filed, but, as the case is
properly here on writ of error, the petition will be denied.
Judgment reversed on writ of error.
Petition for certiorari denied.
* The provisions are printed in the margin of
Louis. &
Nash. R. Co. v. Greene, 244 U. S. 522 at
244 U. S.
533.
MR. JUSTICE BRANDEIS, dissenting.
I do not consider the merits of this case because, in my
opinion, it should be affirmed on a point of practice which was
urged here by the commonwealth. On writ of error to a state court,
even where, as here, this Court has jurisdiction, no objection is
reviewable which was not made there. The question on which the
judgment of the court of appeals of Kentucky is reversed was not
raised or passed upon below.
The claim made below was that the Southern could not be taxed at
all in Kentucky under the unit rule, and that therefore the statute
as applied was void.
Dahnke-Walker Milling Co. v.
Bondurant, 257 U. S. 282,
257 U. S.
288-290. The commonwealth admitted that the Southern, a
Virginia corporation, did not own the Kentucky lines directly.
Page 274 U. S. 87
The Southern admitted that it controlled them by stock
ownership. In support of the claim that the unit rule could not be
applied, the Southern made two contentions. The first was dealt
with by the Court of Appeals in its first opinion, 193 Ky. 474, 237
S.W. 11, the second in its second opinion, 204 Ky. 388. The first
contention was that the unit rule could have no application,
because the Southern was not doing business in Kentucky. That
contention the Court of Appeals decided against the Southern for
all the years, and this Court affirms the ruling. The second
contention was that the unit rule did not apply, because there was
not unity of use and operation of the Kentucky lines with its lines
elsewhere. The question depended upon the amount of control
exercised by the Southern Railway Company over the Cincinnati, New
Orleans & Texas Pacific Railway, which connected the Southern
Railway in Kentucky with the rest of the Southern system. This
contention the Court of Appeals decided in favor of the Southern
for the years 1914, 1915, and 1916, but against it for the years
1917 and 1918. With this ruling also, this Court agrees. The
reversal by this Court is based on an entirely different claim. It
is on the ground that the method of assessment used was such as to
furnish, as a basis for the franchise tax, an amount so
unreasonable and arbitrary as to involve taxation of property
outside the state, in view (1) of the fact that the per mile
earnings of the entire system were so much larger than the per mile
earnings of the Southern in Kentucky, and (2) of the supposed use
of too large a percentage intended to represent the proportion of
the mileage in Kentucky to the total mileage of the system.
The Court of Appeals recognized clearly that it could not tax in
Kentucky any property outside its limits. It upheld the tax as an
increase of assessment upon property located confessedly in
Kentucky, applying the rule of
Pullman Co. v. Richardson,
261 U. S. 330,
261 U. S. 338
that
"if
Page 274 U. S. 88
the property be part of a system and have an augmented value by
reason of a connected operation of the whole, it may be taxed
according to its value as part of the system, although the other
parts be outside the state; in other words, the tax may be made to
cover the enhanced value which comes to the property in the state
through its organic relation to the system."
Applying the unit rule, however, there are two grounds on which
a decision sustaining the claim that property outside the state has
been taxed might have rested if the appropriate claim had been made
below. It might have been held that the statute, so far as it
required the adoption of the mileage plan of valuation, was void as
applied because the different character of the line outside
Kentucky precluded the application of the per mile method as a
basis of valuation.
Compare Fargo v. Hart, 193 U.
S. 490;
Wallace v. Hines, 253 U. S.
66,
253 U. S. 69. Or
it might have been held that the tax was void, because the
additional assessment based on mileage without the state was so
arbitrary and unreasonable in amount as to violate due process.
Compare Union Tank Line Co. v. Wright, 249 U.
S. 275;
Wallace v. Hines, 253 U. S.
66,
253 U. S. 69-70.
But neither of these claims was made in the court below. The only
contentions made there were those which this Court and the lower
court agree in holding unfounded, namely, that the Southern was not
doing business in Kentucky and that there was no such unity of use
and operation of the lines within and those without the state as to
permit of the application of the unit rule. [
Footnote 1]
Page 274 U. S. 89
The second opinion of the Kentucky Court of Appeals recites that
"it is admitted that the assessments for 1917 and 1918 were made in
accordance with and are concluded by the former opinion." Hence, it
was necessary for the plaintiff in error to show that the
objections insisted upon in this Court were raised upon the first
trial or the appeal in the state court. [
Footnote 2] A consideration
Page 274 U. S. 90
of the entire answer and of the entire first opinion make it
altogether clear that the contention, which was advanced by the
answer and refuted by the opinion, consisted solely of the claim
that any assessment against the Southern would be unconstitutional
as taxing property outside the state, because the Southern was not
doing business within the state. Neither the record nor the opinion
of the Court of Appeals discloses that there was an objection to
the assessment as such. Nowhere in the opinion is there any
reference to the figures urged here as showing the arbitrariness of
the statute as applied.
It cannot be said
"that the necessary effect in law of a judgment, which is silent
upon the question, is the denial of a claim or right which might
have been involved therein, but which in fact was never in any way
set up or spoken of."
Dewey v. Des Moines, 173 U. S. 193,
173 U. S. 200.
The rule that a claim or right which was not asserted in the state
court cannot be deemed to have been denied, and hence cannot be
insisted upon in this Court has been long established. [
Footnote 3] It is true also that the
party defeated upon a federal question in a state court will not be
limited in this Court to the same arguments upon that question,
Dewey v. Des Moines, supra, at
173 U. S. 198,
and that, if the federal question is properly raised, it is
immaterial that the state court may have refused to discuss the
point,
Erie R. Co. v. Purdy, 185 U.
S. 148,
185 U. S. 154.
But,
Page 274 U. S. 91
if the contention made below differs from the contention made
here to such a degree that the decision upon one would not
necessarily conclude the other, the raising of one below will not
permit the raising of the other here, even if the same provision of
the Constitution be the basis of both claims.
Compare Dewey v.
Des Moines, supra; Marvin v. Trout, 199 U.
S. 212,
199 U. S.
223-224,
199 U. S.
227.
The importance of the rule of practice is illustrated by the
case at bar. [
Footnote 4]
Because the reasonableness of the method of assessment was not
questioned below, there is nothing in the record to show what
figures and what method of calculation were used by the taxing
officers. The figures adopted by this Court are presented only in
the brief of the plaintiff in error. They are protested by counsel
for the commonwealth. Moreover, there is reason to believe that the
inferences drawn from them are unsound.
[
Footnote 1]
The reason urged by the Southern in support of the second
contention was, as the second opinion recites, that the Kentucky
lines
"had neither physical nor operative connection with lines
outside of the state, . . . and that to apply the notion of organic
unity to all its lines under such circumstances is violative of the
Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States in
that it brings into Kentucky for taxation purposes values wholly
outside of the state. Whether or not this is true is the sole
question presented for decision upon these appeals."
The Court of Appeals decided the second contention in favor of
the Southern for the years 1914, 1915, and 1916 because it
concluded
"that there was in fact no physical connection between the
Northern branch and the Southern branch of the defendant's lines,
and that, despite the defendant's ownership and control of both of
these separate branches, they cannot, under the many decisions of
the Supreme Court of the United States, be considered as parts of a
single system for the purpose of ascertaining the value of
defendant's franchise employed in Kentucky without violating the
Fourteenth Amendment of the federal Constitution."
It held the Southern taxable for the years 1917 and 1918
because, in 1917, the
"defendant acquired the Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas
Pacific Railway Company, and thus unified all of its holdings into
a single unit of use and management."
In considering the situation for the earlier years, it
stated:
"The question for decision then finally narrows to whether, for
the purpose of valuing defendant's franchise employed in Kentucky,
the line from Danville, Kentucky, to St. Louis, Mo., is to be
considered as a separate unit or as a part of a system including
also defendant's eastern and southern lines."
[
Footnote 2]
As showing that they were raised, this Court relies upon the
allegation of the answer that
"the effort made herein is simply for the purpose of endeavoring
to bring into the State of Kentucky for purposes of taxation,
property not in Kentucky; . . . that to do this would be in
violation of . . . the Fourteenth Amendment,"
and upon a quotation from the first opinion of the Kentucky
Court of Appeals to the effect that "it is insisted that this would
result in taxing in Kentucky property having no situs here. . . ."
The reliance of this court appears to rest upon a misapprehension.
On the first trial, the lower courts dismissed the state's
petition. As no method of assessment was before the Court of
Appeals, it could not, in its first opinion, have passed upon the
arbitrariness of this or any other method of assessment.
See 193 Ky. 474, 489.
[
Footnote 3]
In 1836, Mr. Justice Story, because of the fact "that a
different impression exists at the bar," reviewed all the cases
that had reached this Court from the state courts, finding that
they exhibited "a uniformity of interpretation . . . which has
never been broken in upon," requiring that, in order to give the
court jurisdiction, the question sought to be reviewed had both to
be raised in the court below and there decided.
Crowell v.
Randell, 10 Pet. 368,
35 U. S. 392,
35 U. S. 398.
By 1894, Chief Justice Fuller regarded such principles as
"axiomatic."
California Powder Works v. Davis,
151 U. S. 389,
151 U. S. 393.
The rule is still inflexible.
New York v. Kleinert,
268 U. S. 646.
[
Footnote 4]
Compare 73 U. S. v.
Massachusetts, 6 Wall. 632,
73 U. S. 636;
National Bank v.
Commonwealth, 9 Wall. 353,
76 U. S. 363;
Edwards v.
Elliott, 21 Wall. 532,
88 U. S. 557;
Wilson v. McNamee, 102 U. S. 572;
Keokuk & Hamilton Bridge Co. v. Illinois, 175 U.
S. 626,
175 U. S. 633;
Bolln v. Nebraska, 176 U. S. 83,
176 U. S. 90;
Chapin v. Fye, 179 U. S. 127;
Capital City Dairy Co. v. Ohio, 183 U.
S. 238,
183 U. S. 248;
Cox v. Texas, 202 U. S. 446,
202 U. S. 452;
Montana v. Rice, 204 U. S. 291,
204 U. S. 301;
Hunter v. Pittsburgh, 207 U. S. 161,
207 U. S. 180;
Selover, Bates & Co. v. Walsh, 226 U.
S. 112;
Illinois Central R. Co. v. Mulberry Coal
Co., 238 U. S. 275,
238 U. S. 281;
Bullen v. Wisconsin, 240 U. S. 625,
240 U. S. 632;
Hiawassee River P. Co. v. Power Co., 252 U.
S. 341.
Compare Virginian Ry. Co. v. Mullens,
271 U. S. 220.