Southwestern Railroad v. Wright

116 U.S. 231, 6 S. Ct. 375, 29 L. Ed. 626, 1886 U.S. LEXIS 1758
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedJanuary 4, 1886
Docket96
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 116 U.S. 231 (Southwestern Railroad v. Wright) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Southwestern Railroad v. Wright, 116 U.S. 231, 6 S. Ct. 375, 29 L. Ed. 626, 1886 U.S. LEXIS 1758 (1886).

Opinion

Mr. Chief Justice Waite

delivered.the'opinion of the court.

These suits relate to the liability of the Southwestern Railroad Company, a Georgia corporation, for taxes on different parts of its railroad, and the Federal question involved arises *232 lender a claim of a charter contract of exemption from all taxation beyond “a tax of one-half of one per cent, upon its annual net income.” The company owns and operates, 1, a road frpm Macon through Fort Yalley, Américus, Smith ville, and Ciithbert to Fort Gaines; 2, a road from Smith ville to Albany; 3^' a road from Albany to Arlington; 4, a road from Outhbert to Eufaula; and, 5, a road from Fort Yalley to Columbus. The line of all these roads is shown on the following plat:

The road from Macon to Américus .and from Smithville to Fort Gaines was built under the original charter of the company granted December 14,1845. Section 14 of this charter is g.s follows:

"§ 14. That the said railway and. its appurtenances, and all property therewith connected, shall'not be subject to be taxed *233 higher than one-half of one per cent, upon its annual net income.”

From Americus through Smithville to Albany the building was done by the Georgia and Florida Railroad Company, under a charter granted January 22, 1852. Section 2 of this charter is as follows:

“ That the Georgia and Florida Railroad Company may, at any time, incorporate their stock with the stock of any other company, on such terms as may be mutually agreed upon by such companies: Provided, that the road and other property of this company shall be subject to such taxation as the legislature may deem equitable and just.”

After this part of the road was finished the Georgia and Florida Company agreed with the Southwestern Company to consolidate its stock with that of the Southwestern, and thereupon it delivered its road, then running from Americus to Albany, into the possession of the Southwestern Company. This having been done, the general assembly of Georgia, on the 19th of December, 1859, passed an act which recited what had been done, and then enacted:

“Section 2. Be it further enacted, That the said railroad from Americus to Albany, shall be considered part and parcel of the road of the Southwestern Railroad Company, and be liable to pay the State the same tax that .the rest of the Southwestern Railroad Company is liable to .pay; and such additional tax as the legislature may hereafter impose.”

The Southwestern Company now holds this part of its road under this transfer.

The road, from Albany to Arlington was built under an act of the general assembly passed December 18, 1860, as follows:

“An Act to amend the several acts of the’general assembly relating to the Southwestern Railroad Company, and to authorize the said company to construct a branch railroad, and for other purposes.”
“ Section 1. Be it enacted, etc., That the Southwestern Railroad Company, of this State, are hereby authorized to construct a branch railroad from Albany, or Dawson, or any point west *234 of Dawson, on their line of road, to such place on the Chattahoochee River, or on the Florida line, as the said company may select, and that said. company shall have for these purposes all the rights, privileges, and powers conferred by their charter of incorporation and the act amendatory thereof.
“ Section 2. Be it further enacted, etc., That said company are hereby-empowered and authorized to increase their capital stock $1,000,000.00, and said additional stock shall be subject and liable to pay the same rates of tax to the State of Georgia that is now required of the said Southwestern Railroad Company, and such additional tax as the legislature may hereafter impose.”

The road from Cuthbert to Eufaula was built under the following act, passed February 23, 1850 :

“ An Act to amend an act entitled An act to incorporate the Southwestern Railroad Company, with power to extend branches to Albany, in the county of Baker, and Fort Gaines, in the county of Early, and to points'below those places on the Chattahoochee and Flint Rivers, and to pun- ■ ish those who may wilfully injure the same, assented to December 27th, 1845, and for other purposes.’
“ Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate .and House of Representatives of the State of Georgia, in general assembly met, and it is hereby enacted. by .the authority of the same, That from and after the. passage of this act said railroad company shall have power and authority to construct a branch of said road from some point on said road to any point on the Chattahoochee River, below the town of Florence, in the county of Stewart, which said company may deem most advisable and proper, under the rules and restrictions as they are now authorized to construct said Southwestern Railroad :■ Provided, That if said company do not’ build the main trunk of said road to or below Fort Gaines within two years from the time that the same is completed to the point at which the said branch road, if commenced, may intersect, then said company shall be liable to refund to the stockholders, now residing in Early and Ran *235 dolph Counties, or their assigns, the amount of stock held by them, with interest from the time the same was paid.”

The road from Fort Yalley to Columbus was built by the Muscogee Railroad Company, under a charter "granted December 27, 1845, which contained a clause upon the subject of taxation, substantially like § 14 of the charter of the Southwestern Company. The two companies were afterwards consolidated, and, when the case in Which the State of Georgia appears as defendant in error was before this court on a former writ of error, it was decided that this road and that part of the road of the Southwestern Company which was built under the original charter, were exempt from taxation beyond one-half. of one'per cent, upon their annual net income. Southwestern Railroad Co. v. Georgia, 92 U. S. 676.

The Supreme Court of the State has decided in both these cases that the roads from Americus to Albany, from Albany to Arlington, and from Cuthbert to Eufaula were subject to the general laws óf the State for the taxation of railroads, without regard to the exemption in the original charter of the company. ■ To reverse judgments to this effect these writs of - error were brought.

There is no question now as to the exemption from general taxation of that part of the road built under the original charter. -That .we have already decided, and there is no dispute about it now. The language of the exempting clause is somewhat unusual. It is not that the company or its stock shall be taxed in a certain way and otherwise exempt, but that the “said railway and its appurtenances, and all property therewith connected, shall not be subject to be taxed higher,” &c. This clearly means the railroad specified in the charter, and none other.

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

Related

Georgia Public Service Commission v. Atlanta Gas Light Co.
55 S.E.2d 618 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1949)
In re Central of Georgia Ry. Co.
47 F. Supp. 786 (S.D. Georgia, 1942)
Howard v. State Ex Rel. McGarry
146 So. 414 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1933)
McIntyre v. Harrison
157 S.E. 499 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1931)
Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Wright
250 U.S. 519 (Supreme Court, 1919)
Hudson v. Hopkins &8212 McGuire v. McCurdy
1919 OK 183 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1919)
American Railroad v. Municipality of San Juan
9 P.R. Fed. 523 (D. Puerto Rico, 1917)
Schock, Okmulgee County Treasurer v. Sweet
1914 OK 635 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1914)
Allen v. Trimmer, County Treasurer
1914 OK 550 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1914)
Kidd v. Roberts, County Treas
1914 OK 481 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1914)
Baltimore, Cheaspeake & Atlantic Railway Co. v. Mayor of Ocean City
42 A. 922 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1899)
Wilmington & Weldon Railroad v. Alsbrook
146 U.S. 279 (Supreme Court, 1892)
Wilmington & Weldon Railroad v. Alsbrook
14 S.E. 652 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1892)
Board of Commissioners v. Simons
13 L.R.A. 512 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1891)
State Board of Assessors v. Paterson & Ramapo Railroad
14 A. 610 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1888)
Dow v. Northern Railroad
36 A. 510 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1886)
Vicksburg, Shreveport & Pacific Railroad v. Dennis
116 U.S. 665 (Supreme Court, 1886)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
116 U.S. 231, 6 S. Ct. 375, 29 L. Ed. 626, 1886 U.S. LEXIS 1758, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/southwestern-railroad-v-wright-scotus-1886.