The Lake County star. [volume] (Chase, Mich.) 1873-current, 1873-08-07
FaIMg Railroad Lands,

State, has lately been instituted
before the u. S. Courtat Detroit.
The case was to have come mp &c
trial some weeks since, but was
postponed on account Of the i'll
ness of Judge Emmons. Court
has now adj urncd, and tho mat
ter will doubtless remain IN
decided until the Fall Term.
Many Of orr readers arc aware
that at its last session the Lcgis-
lature, after a bitter struggle, pas
scd an act making the land earned
10y Railways under their grants
and still owned by them, taxable
tho same as other lands, The
county officers, in compliance with
this act, have proceeded to make
up their lists of assessments for
the taxes Of 1878, and, of course,
include the lands of the Railways.
The several Isailways interested
have combined to resist tho tax.
Their nance arc as follows:
Grand Rapids & Indiana; Jack
son, Lansing & Saginaw; Mar
quette, lloughton & Ontonagon;
Chicago & Northwestern, and the
Flint Il Pore Marquette.
The case above referred to is
considered a test case, arises in
this (Wcstern) District, and Is en-
titled "Chas. II. Tucker ct al,
Trustees vs. Nelson Ferguson ct
al, SUI ervisors Of Osceola county.
The trial will probably DO held
before Judge Emmons, Of the U.
s.. Circuit Court; Judgo Whitney,
Of the Western District. and Judge
Longycar, of the Eastern District.
Injunction papers arc now IN file
in THE county, asking the restrain
ing of the county authorities from
further. action in the matter oil
taxing the lands alluded to in the
bill which alleges substantially as
follows:
grant ofpublic lands by the United States
June 5, 1866, to aid in the construction o
certain railways, and among them one from
Flint to Perc Marquette, and that the Stat
could dispose Of the land for no other pur
pose; that the Flint and Pcrc Marquctt,
Railway Company was organized prior Il
FEBRUARY IA, 1857 and to build that road ,unde
the act of Michigan of 1875; that this STATE
accepted the grant on said last named day
nv an act ctitlcd An act disposing of sale
land grants and thereby disposed OF, gran
ted to, conferred upon and vested fully anC
completely in said Company the lands Il
be applied exclusively in the construction
said road; that the Company voted to acc .p
the lands, and filed its map S. etc: Kat tn
State passed other acts, and some amendatC
" Erecting the. several acts passed fror
time to time): said Con. ANY comp leted i.
road 'as required bv Jaw, and Ia entitled to a
exemptions an" privileges contained in sal
legislation and grant.
Lists of the lands embraced in the gran
and to which the Company was entitlc
were made at the general land Office and az
proved by the Secretary of the Interior, part
Of which lands gre sold leaving unsold
Company; that the Company maos Z AihBt,
gage, or trust deed, dated September 2;
lS66,.cOnvcying part of this land as secur
ty for $5O0,OOO in bonds, issued and sol
and outstanding in the hands Of divers per
sons, except such as have been cancelled b
the proceeds of the lands sold: and that tn
Company, Sept 4. 1863, mortgaged to com
plainants the rest Of their lands to secur
bonds amounting to S., 5OO,O 900; that tn
proceeds OF bonds soki have been applied {,
the construction of the road; that the defer
dants are supervisors of certain towns whicl
contain said lnds;that defendants have mad
out assessment rolls and listed land, upOl
which to app0rti0n taxes for 1878, and CLAIM
the lands SO held by complainants are subjcc
TO taxation like lands Of individuals; sal,
listing is illegal and oppressive; that If take
are so extended by the Michigan statute the,
will become prima facie lien on the frs
Monday Of December next and a cloud OF
the tito, which should be prevented by in
junction: that the lands were held by tn,
Company when ii made the mortgages exemp
from local taxation, that by the aforesaid
legislation and agreements and he building
OF the road an irrevocable contract was maj:
by which the lands should remain free from
local taxation while they remain unsold; anC
that this State is prohibited by the Cniics
States Constitution from impairiDg the obi
cation of said contractby passing an act to Ia,
said lands: that by the General Railroad Law
Of 1871 it was provided that Railroads Shout,
| pay specific tax on gross receipts and thai
oEly such portions Of the land grants as ar,
| opposite to and co-terininous with the con
structed portions of the road shall DC liable
to local taxation, and that not till three years
from April l, 1871, or three years from leas
ing the lands; lands Of lines then in operation
iva years Compartments lands were no,
co,terminous with the built part Of the road
In April, 1871. The lands In qucstion are
not affected by the act of 1871 by reason Of
the contract aforesaid. But If otherwise
and the alleged contract do not exist to pre-
vent the Legislature from taxing, then the
act Of 1871 is grant Of an exemption and b
a contract for the benefit Of the Company Of
which the compliments may avail them
selves and said contract Of 1871 II irrepcal.
able under the aforesaid clause Of the United
Sites Court.
The Till further alleges that the Railroad
Company il not liable to the proposed taxa
ton because it con lawfully be charged only
with specific taxes; that specific taxes only
are law ful under tha State Constitution, and
That the Legislature cannot change the mode
of taxation IN respect to such property; the
title Of the State was in trust for tho SPECIFIC
purpose, and the Stsse could no. dispose Of
the lands only to aid in VIC construction ol
Roads; that :. Is a violation cf trust for tho
State to assume TO derive rcveBnefrom the
lands before they arc sold by the Company
to whom they are granted. =,
As wo said at tho commence
ment Of this article, the case above
alluded To in n test case. and will