Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1875-04-04

LOulsNlAle AkOtau AlArmeO-lne COurN
Equally Divided ON the Main Ques-
tIOn-An Abstract Of the Opinions.
The case of the Louisville and Nashville
Railroad, against Austin, County Judge of
Sumner, involving the right to tax rail-
roads, was decided by the Supreme Court,
yesterday.
II. NJ. Austin, Judge of the County
Court Of Sumner county, having assessed
the Louisville and Nashville Railroad for
taxation, for the years 1873 and 1874, for
all purposes, the railroad company applies
for, and obtains a supersedeas against the
levy. The railroad is located for some
thirty-three miles through Sumner county,
and the county Judge assesses the thirty
three miles at 5000 for 1873, and at
$4,000 for 1874, the taxes for the two
years amounting to $4,000. Upon the
trial Of the cause below before Judge Guild,
be dismissed the petition and the railroad
company appealed.
Messrs. &. r. Head, Wilson and Vertrees
and Ed. Baxter appeared for the company,
and J. J. Turner, J. W. McHenry, and At
tOrney-General Heiskell, for the State,
Sumner county, and the Cumberland and
Ohio Railroad.
Justice Sneed delivered the opinion Of
the court, and his opinion, which is a very
learned one and evidently prepared with
great care, DEGREES to the following penis:
/. That the bonds issued by Sumner
county to the e. and D. railroad were
legal and bearing upon the county of Sum
ner and upon its tax payers.
2. That under the Constitution Of 1870,
there is no difference in the exempted
E,t gF,o1r ID
or in giving it credit.
3. That mere irregularities in a subsCrip-
ton would not effect the bonds of a county
when issued. That though the PROPOSE
ton was submitted by the county at the
May term Of 1871, instead Of at a Quarterly
term, yet this cannot affect the bonds, as
the real question was the vote Of the people
upon the proposition.
4. That a tax payer under the act Of
March %, 1873, has no right or power to
eDjOin his taxes or to sUpersede them, but
that under said act he must first pay them
and then sue the collector, as provided in
section 1 Of said act, chapter A.
3. The court were unanimously of the
opinion that railroads were the subjects Of
taxation under the Constitution Of 1870.
The court also held that a corporation has
four elements Of value OF taxation, viz:
Cd its capital stock; o. its property, real
and personal; 90 its franchises; and az
the shares Of the stockholders.
9. Three Of the judges, viz: Sneed, Tur-
ney and Freeman, hold that the act Of
March ., 1873, was broad enough to cover
and include the taxation of railroads, as
all property is taxed under the Constitu-
ton, except such as is specifically exempt
ed, and that it was not reasonably to be
supposed that the Legislature meant to
exempt so large an element Of value from
taxation.
Z. Judges Nicholson, Mcfarland and
Deaderick, in a dissenting opinion, insisted
that though railroads were the subjects Of
taxation under the Constitution, and that
the Legislature had the power 10 tax them,
unless specially exempted under their char
ter. vet that the revenue act of March %,
1873, cannot by its terms embrace the taxa
tion Of railroads. They held that the Cor
stitutiOn upon the subject Of taxation was
imperative unless carried out by apprOpri-
ate legislation, and that as said act of 1873
was silent upon the subject, and failed to
point out the manner Of taxing them, that
they could not be taxed till the Legislature
acted in tie matter.
The judgement Of the court below,
which taxed the railroad, was affirmed,
under the provision Of the late act Of the
Legislature, which provides that in all
cases where the Supreme Court are equally
divided in opinion, the judgment Of the
court below shall be affirmed.