Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1879-05-29
The CASE CLOSED.
The Receivers Bill Brought to
a Terminal Point.
Judges Baxter and Hammond Ger
tify to a Division Of Opinion
and Send the Great Case
to the United States
Supreme Court.

.L . .H.. A|.... ..HH. .-.I
After several days consultation by
a raft of lawyers large enough to form
a respectable company of volunteers
to fight the Indians or Zulus, the great
case on which the present city govern
ment's legality is founded was to-day
settled as far as Judges Ham
mond and Baxter are concerned.
1t now goes to the Uni
ted States Supreme Court for
final review and decision. The case,
it is thought, can be examined and
decided upon in October next, and it
is to be hoped hal it will not be de-
layed beyond then. A few Of the
points in the contest, which, as has
been stated, is a suit by Robert Gar
rett and SOM against the city Of Mem
phis, are as follows:
Judge Baxter was of opinion that
the following should be disallowed,
and Judge Hammond that they be APP
proved, viz: Regarding the decree APP
pointing T. ]. Latham receiver, and
directing him to collect delinquent
taxes, and the motion to vacate set
aside the order appointing him re-
ceiyer. AS to the question whether
the act Of the general assembly ex-
tinguishes all claims due by the old
corporation, including that Of com.
plainants, the judges also were OPP
posed. The question, in the event Of
the charter repeal being valid, and
that its effects was not to extinguish
all claims, has this court Jurisdiction
to collect the taxes which had been
assessed, the judges stand opposed.
Ga the question as to whether the
court had jurisdiction as to the bills
prior to January 20, 1879, the date Of
che charter repeal, to seize the assets,
revenue and properties, and to place
them in the hands Of a receiver APP
pointed by the court to collect and
disburse the same to creditors of the
old corporation, the opinion of the
judges stand opposed.
The question as to the legality OF
the charter repeal passed January
18th, is also opposed.
They also stand opposed on the ques.
ton as to whether this court has
jurisdiction TO enforce the lcin on reaI
estate for taxes which the municipal
corporation possessed. Also, on the
question whether on the entire record
the court has jurisdiction to entertain
the bills and grant relief to the com.
plainants also, as to taxes already
levied and unsolicited, should they
prove insufficient to pay all creditors
that whether the court has power t
bring in all or partofthe inhabitants anC
assess them to pay the balance also
as to whether the creditors have RICH.
to relief except such as the State ma,
afford throughits legislature also as Il
whether the appointment Of Receive
Latham was not in violation of tn,
United States Constitution as we'll a
Of the State of Tennessee also as t,
whether back or delinquent taxes cal
be forced to a collection through tn
courts receiver, and if so, in wha
court, State or Federal, can suits b,
brought, and in what way can they b
collected.
Many other points arc named whicl
will come up for adjudication also
long list of objections offered by Stat
Receiver Meriwether. They are to-
numerous and complicated to be clear
" understood, sifted and written on
for to-day, so the foregoing synopsis
only can be given.
M. No-...I n--.I.. n