Arkansas Midland R. R. v. Berry

44 Ark. 17
CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas
DecidedNovember 15, 1884
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 44 Ark. 17 (Arkansas Midland R. R. v. Berry) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Arkansas Midland R. R. v. Berry, 44 Ark. 17 (Ark. 1884).

Opinion

Smith, J.

The appellant filed a bill in the Phillips Circuit Court, alleging an incorporation-under an act of the General Assembly, approved January 20,1855, and claimed, under section 2 of said act, to be exempt from taxation until from its legitimate profits a dividend of ten per cent, on the amount of its capital stock was earned; that no such dividend, nor any profits which could properly be so applied, had been earned; that its property was assessed for taxation, and the proper officers were demanding said taxes, and would proceed in a summary way to collect the same, if not restrained. Pending a hearing, a restraining order was asked for, with a prayer that the same be made perpetual after a final hearing of the cause. An injunction was granted, and a bond executed by appellant.

In the first paragraph of the answer it was admitted to be true that by an act of the General Assembly, approved Januai-y 20, 1855, the Arkansas Midland Railroad Company was chartered, and that an organization under said charter had been effected, and that by section 2 of said act the property and capital stock of said railroad company was to be exempt from taxation until its legitimate profits •would enable it to pay a dividend of ten per cent, on the capital stock thereof. But it was alleged that by the action of the board of directors on August 31, 1870, and of the stockholders on September 21, 1870, the name of the said Arkansas Midland Railroad Company was changed to that of the Arkansas Central Railway Company, and that thenceforth, under its adopted name, the said Arkansas Midland Railroad Company proceeded to carry out the purposes contemplated by its charter; that under said adopted name it applied for and collected large subscriptions made to its capital stock, under its original and true name; applied to the State for aid under the act supposed to authorize the same to be granted, and actually constructed the line of railroad now sought to be relieved from the taxes levied thereon ; that by section 10 of said act, approved January 20,1855, the said Arkansas Midland Railroad Company was empowered, through its president and directory, to borrow money for certain purposes, on the credit of said corporation, and to secure any bonds issued for sums thus borrowed, a conveyance by mortgage or trust deed of “their” corporate franchises and property, was authorized; that on the first day of July, 1871, the power to mortgage, as aforesaid, was exercised by said Arkansas Midland Rail-read Company under its said adopted name; that on the eighteenth day of May, 1873, the power to incumber by mortgage was further exercised, in a manner and for a purpose fully set forth in the complaint; that said railroad company made default in the performance of the conditions of said conveyances; that foreclosure proceedings followed, and a sale of the property and franchises of said company was made thereunder; that the present owners of said property and franchises are holders under the purchasers at said sale; that the immunity from taxation was not acquired by virtue of the purchase at the foreclosure sale, and the same became extinguished thereby, and it was submitted that the assessment and levy were correct, and the complaint should be dismissed.

The second paragraph of the answer alleged a consolidation of the Arkansas Midland Railroad Company with the Little Rock and Helena Railroad Company in September, 1870.

The Circuit Court found the facts to be as follows: “That prior to 1870 there was effected a lawful organization under the charter of the Arkansas Midland Railroad Company granted by an act of the General Assembly of the State of Arkansas, approved January 20, 1855; that on the thirty-first day of August, 1870, the board of directors of said Arkansas Midland Railroad Company adopted a resolution declaring said Arkansas Midland Railroad Company to be thereby consolidated with the Helena and Little Rock Railroad Company, and that said consolidated company be thereafter known as the Arkansas Central Railway Company; that this action of the directory was, on the twenty-first day of September, 1870, reported to a meeting of the stockholders of said Arkansas Midland Railroad Company, and the same was, to the extent of changing the name of said company to that of the Arkansas Central Railway Company, ratified and confirmed; that thereafter said Arkansas Midland Railroad Company carried on its business and was known as the Arkansas Central Railway Company; that under said name it applied for and received bonds in payment of subscription to the capital stock of the Arkansas Midland Railroad Company by the city of Helena, Phillips and Monroe counties, and aid from the State of Arkansas; that on the thirteenth day of April, 1871, its board of directors authorized the execution of a conveyance, by mortgage or trust deed, of its property and franchises to secure an issue of bonds to be made in furtherance of the construction of its line of railroad ; that on July 3, 1871, the stipulations to be incorporated in the mortgage or trust deed were modified by the board of directors, and in accordance therewith on said third day of July, 1871, there was executed and delivered by said Arkansas Central Railway Company a mortgage or trust deed whereby was conveyed to the Union Trust Company, of New York, as trustee, all of the property and franchises of said railway company to secure said issue of bonds amounting to $1,200,000 ; that on April, 1873, another mortgage or trust deed was, by said Arkansas Central Railway Company, executed to the same trustee to secure an issue of bonds amounting to $480,000, alleged to be made in substitution of the same amount of the issue under the former mortgage; that default of the payment of interest on the bonds aforesaid having taken place in 1877, there was instituted in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, sitting at Helena with Circuit Court powers, a suit to foreclose the lien of said trust deeds ; that a decree of foreclosure was in due course entered, and a sale in pursuance thereof made by the Master of said court; that at said sale S. H. Hornor was the purchaser for the sum of forty thousand dollars, and by said purchase became the owner of all the property and franchises of the Arkansas Midland Railroad Company doing business and operating under the name of the Arkansas Central Railway Company; that said sale was confirmed by the court under whose decree it was made on August 9, 1877 ; that the plaintiff is the owner of the franchises and property of the Arkansas Midland Railroad Company under the purchase of said Hornor, at the foreclosure sale aforesaid.”

1‘tion;íxa" tioiñoeraiu

2. same: Exemption lost by non.

The bill was accordingly dismissed, and the correctness *bat decree depends rather upon questions of fact than controverted propositions of law. If the old Midland Company, which owed its existence to a special charter, is in substance and legal contemplation the same corporation which executed the deed of trust to the Union Trust Company, and that deed has been foreclosed and the plaintiff occupies the position of a purchaser at the foreclosure sale, then the immunity from taxation is lost, upon the principle that it was a mere personal privilege and incapable of transfer. (M. & L. R. R. Co. v. Berry, 41 Ark., 436, affirmed on error, 112 U. S., 609; Morgan v. Louisiana, 93 U.

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

Related

Bryan v. Bliss-Cook Oak Co.
178 F. 217 (Eighth Circuit, 1910)
State v. Great Northern Railway Co.
119 N.W. 202 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1908)
Northern Pacific Railroad v. Barnes
51 N.W. 386 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1892)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
44 Ark. 17, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arkansas-midland-r-r-v-berry-ark-1884.