Saint Mary's beacon. [volume] (Leonard Town, Md.) 1867-1983, 1871-06-08

CcuRr On ArrKAls.-The Court Of Ap.
peals hare fled their opinion in the cass
Of the Stats Of Maryland against the Bal.
timofe and Ohio Railroad Company. re-
versing the Judgment Of the superior
Court Of Baltimore, and ordering new
trial. Chief Justice Bartol delivered the
opinion Of the Court. Judges Alvey and
Grayson fled separate opinion. The
opinion Of thc majority of the Court re-
verses M11sfAhe rulings Of the Superior
Court, and sustains the plaintiffs case
generally. Il decides that the ene-fifth
Of the passenger receipts on the Washing
ton Branch road claimed by the State is
bonus, and not tax-that the act oil
the General Assembly requiring said pay
ment is constitutional, and whether con-
stitutional or not, the State has right to
the money. Judges Alvey and Grayson
fully agree with the opinion of the major
ity Of the Court, except as to the form Of
action, which they think, instead of being
''for money bad and received" should
have been brought in assumpsit undert the
statute.
The following extract from the decision
will give the reader knowledge Of the
points upon which the decision of Judge
Dobbin was reversed, and new trial Or
dered:
These acts Comforting the power to col
lect the passenger taxi, when accepted by
the defendant, became contract between
the Company and the State. 1t was en-
tered into in good faith and for valuable
and sufficient consideration. 1t certainly
did not enter into the Imagination Of the
parties that it was in any respect repug-
nant to the Constitution. 1t has been &C :
quiesced in. and faithfully observed by
the Company for more than thirty years.
This Court is now called on to declare. it
unconstitutional and void, because it is
alleged to be law imposing a capitation
tax upon passengers. Such was not the
purpose of the Legislature. nor is such
intention to be found in the provisions OF
the law.
1t seems very clear to US that the money
reserved by the State is tax npon the
corporation, not subjected to any consti-
tutiohal objections.
The power Of the State to impose such
tax or burden upon the Company. with
its consent, is too clear to be questioned
The corporation was created by the laws
of the State, and except so far as exempt
ed by its charter. il is subject TO the jurisdic-
ton and power Of the State.
In the case Of Mccullough rs. The
State, 4 Wheaton, 400, Chief Justice
Marshal. in speaking of the power of tax
alton By State, says: ut is obvious
that it is an incident of sovereignty, and
is coextensive with that to which it is in.
cident." "All subjects over
which the sovereign power Of State ex-
tends are objects Of taxation; but those
over which it does not extend are upon
the soundest principles excmp. from taxa
ton.
Tho sovereignty of State extends to
everything which exists by its own author
ity, or is introduced by its permission"
This is the distinct and we'll defined
power to which We are to refer the legis-
lation of the State now in question. Is
it tax upon the corporation? This ques-
ton is answered by the terms of the law,
and its whole tenor and scope. The mo-
ney is payable by the Company out of its
own receipts. The passenger fare receiv-
cd by the Company is simply the toll for
transportation collected BY virtue of its
powers under tho charter; these are reg
ulated in its discretion. subject only to
the limitation described by <he act Of As
sembly. and which the State had the I'M
doubted power to prescribe. Under the
law it is bound to render accounts of its
gross revenue from passenger transporta-
ton, and to pay to the State sun equiv
ale3t to one-afth of she whole amount so
received.
The sums payable to the State are to
be ascertained by reference to the amount
of gross receipts or income Of the Compa-
ny from passenger transportation this
furnishes the standard or basis of the COM
pensation