The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1871-01-14
The Marshall County Railroad Tax
Gases.

10 hHOEu DON SUES InlE uehTluS1 We
copy elsewhere q letter addressed to the
Register by Mr.. LAMB, reviewing our ed.
itorial Of Wednesday and Communica-
tion in our columns Thursday, touching
the compromise OF the Marshall County
Railroad Tax cases In the Supreme Court
In the same connection may be found a
letter from Gov. STANTON replying to this
letter of Mr.. LAMB. Tfewlu
Mr.. LAMn errs in attributlng the au.
thorshlp oGour editOrialW ednosdAy to Mr.,
STANTON. That gentleman's denial, 1t
will be seen, Is quite explicit We had
not seen the Governor, nor Ind any com.
munlcatlon with him, subsequent to the
compromise, ut the time Of writing the
article; and he could have had no knowl.
clSn whatever Of the article till he saw 1t
in Wednesday morning IETRLLIGENcER.
Wednesday morning VIC received from
him tho communication which appeared
in our columns Thursday. TWAS accom-
panied by note, which we now copy
here: ..-l .s....s.. s
auI WHEELING, Jan, II, 1871.
The enclosed paper was prepared lust
night for the purpose oil furnishing you
such information as you might need In
the discussion Of the subject In tho INTEL
LIGENoER. Your editorial this morning
supCrcedes the necessity for much the
larger portion II not the whole OF II.
Still send It to you that you may use
any part Of It that you may think useful
in any further discussion Of the subject.
knew nothing about the compromise
until after Il was closed and the money
paid. II | had, | would have protested
against II, or against any settlement that
would have prevented decision OF tho
case. 'tt b. STANTON.
We print this note now, without the
knowledge Of the writer, as an act OF
justice to him as much rs in vindication
of ourselves. It will be found 10 CORES.
pond with the statement in his communi.
cation this morning. 1t shows, first, that
Gov. STANTON had not previously commu.
nicated with us on the subject OF the COM
promise, and, second, that the paper en-
closed by him Wednesday was then fur.
nishcd not for publication but to apprise
us Of all tho facts, Of which no one who
had not made special study Of the case
could be expected to be accurately In.
formed. Believing the public, and espe.
cially the people Of Marshall county, were
entitled to know all the iacts in tho case,
we printed the paper neutrality-suspicious.
communicating our intention to tho writer,
not considering rs we perhapsshould have
done, that 1t might involve some differ
ences between him and Ills associate
counsel In the case, Mr.. LAMB. For 1t
should be understood that Mr., LAMB was
the counsel for Marshall county, while
Governor STANTON was his associate coun.
sci appointed by tho Governor 10 look al
ter the rights Of the State that were In
vOlved the suits.
As II regards tho merits of the question,
we have no occasion to modify the views
expressed Wednesday morning; nor to no.
tice al any length Mr.. LAMR's reply, for
in the main 1t Is sufficiently answered by
Mr. STANTON. There is a single point,
however, not noticed by the latter, to
which It seems proper to refer: Mr..
LAMB says.
"The cases originally involved the
question Of State taxes as well as County
taxes; but the State, Notwithstanding
what the Governor the INTELLIGENCER
calls the Importance oil establishing her
right Of taxation for oil time, compro.
missed her claims against the Railroad
Company for past due taxes, without set
thing the right for the future, In the ad.
justment the State, like Marshall county,
threw of the interest and pait Of the
principal due her, without binding tho
Company to pay taxes in future.
The reference 10 this precedent Is not a
happy one. The so.called compromise
made by the State was made upon author.
ity of a joint resolution crowded through
the Legislature, in the last hours Of tho
session, under extraordinary pressure, and
by the sharp tactics employed by MIR.
LAMB himself, then a member Of the
House Of Delegates. The fact that 1t was
Mr.. LAND himself who prepared the way
for this compromise deprives him Of any
right to quote 1t as precedent Men
Can'tyQuote precedents made BY them
selves. .sy ..,.,srn7.-
In further justification Mr.. LAME says:
by joint resolution adopted March 4,
1860, the Legislature authorized the
Board Of Supervisors Of every county
through which the Railroad runs 10 COM
promise on fair and liberal terms the taxes
assigned by the county against the COM
pany."
This was the same resolution already
referred 70. 1t authorized compromises
both by State and county. But in view
Of the circumstances attending the pas.
sage Of that resolution, already refer
ierred To, we are rather surprised TO find
Mr.. LAMB relying on it for justification
Bad as he seems to regard tho compromise
made by the. State, judging from the allu.
sions to It above quoted, We have shown
that II was he who paved the way for It,
and Il appears on his own showing that
this Marshall county compromise, which
he says he recommended, Is stlllworse,
for while neither secures any concession
OF the right to tax, the claim surrendered
H., AZ. ,,H,,,.,,, 4 a,,..1 1,n,ns ta.s,n,.