Definition
A constitutional phrase appearing in state constitutional provisions that requires property to be taxed in proportion to its value — that is, uniformly and without discrimination based on the identity of the owner or the character of the property. The phrase is typically completed as "all property shall be taxed according to its value" and functions as the textual basis for the uniformity doctrine in state ad valorem taxation. It prohibits the legislature from imposing differential tax rates on property of equivalent value and requires assessment to reflect actual worth rather than arbitrary or favored classifications.
The phrase is not a standalone legal term but a constitutional fragment that triggers a body of interpretation concerning tax uniformity, equal protection in taxation, and the permissible scope of exemptions. Its force depends entirely on the specific state constitutional text from which it is drawn.
---
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers encountering this phrase in historical sources are most likely working in one of three contexts: constitutional convention debates, state supreme court opinions construing uniformity clauses, or challenges to differential assessment schemes.
The phrase gained significant litigative force in the latter half of the nineteenth century as states industrialized and legislatures attempted to favor certain classes of property — railroads, agricultural land, personal property held by corporations — with lower assessments or special rates. Courts in this era used uniformity language to strike down what would today be called preferential tax treatment.
The Rapalje & Lawrence citation to 13 Am. Rep. 143 and 43 Cal. 331 signals that this phrase was actively contested in state courts by the 1870s-1880s. Researchers using nineteenth-century California materials should be alert to the fact that California's 1849 and 1879 constitutions both contained uniformity language, and the interpretation of that language shifted between the two instruments. The 43 Cal. citation places the dispute squarely in the 1879 constitutional period, when California courts were actively working out the implications of the revised tax uniformity clause.
A recurring trap in historical sources: early courts sometimes treated uniformity as an absolute prohibition, while later courts developed doctrine permitting classification of property for tax purposes so long as the classification was reasonable. Research bridging the nineteenth and twentieth centuries must track this doctrinal shift carefully. What a court in 1875 called an unconstitutional discrimination, a court in 1920 might have characterized as a permissible classification.
Corpus connections: this phrase links directly to materials on assessment law, state constitutional interpretation, ad valorem taxation, and the Fourteenth Amendment's relationship to state tax structures. The equal protection dimension became increasingly prominent after the 1880s as federal constitutional arguments supplemented state uniformity claims.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Rapalje & Lawrence treat this phrase economically — listing it as an interpreted phrase in state constitutions with two case citations rather than a discursive definition. This reflects the dictionary's general method for constitutional phrases: identification and citation rather than substantive analysis. The entry clusters the phrase with neighboring constructions ("all rents and profits," "all sorts of wool," "all the buildings thereon") that are similarly phrase-level interpretive entries, suggesting the editors viewed this as a matter of documentary construction rather than a doctrine meriting extended treatment.
The two citations anchor the phrase in American state constitutional practice of the 1870s. The 13 Am. Rep. 143 citation points to a case reported in the American Reports series, a compilation of selected state court opinions from the post-Civil War period regarded as presenting decisions of general interest across jurisdictions. The 43 Cal. 331 citation is a California Supreme Court decision. Together they signal that by the early 1880s this phrase had already generated enough conflicting or noteworthy interpretation to warrant citational reference in a general law dictionary.
What Rapalje & Lawrence do not provide — and what researchers should not expect from nineteenth-century dictionary entries of this kind — is any account of how uniformity doctrine developed, how courts defined "value" for assessment purposes, or how exemptions were reconciled with the absolute-sounding language of uniformity clauses. Those questions are answered by the case law, not the dictionary.
---
Jurisdictional Note
The phrase appears in various forms across state constitutions and does not have a single uniform text. The scope of the uniformity requirement — whether it applies only to rate, only to assessment, or to both; whether it permits property classification; whether it governs exemptions — varies significantly by state and by era. Federal constitutional uniformity requirements under Article I apply only to federal duties, imposts, and excises, not to state property taxes. State-law uniformity clauses remain the governing authority for state ad valorem taxation.
---