Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1879-05-29
1T IS CERTIFIED.
The Celebrated Cases of the Creditors
Against the City of Memphis-The
Lawyers Make Up the ImpOr-
tant Issues and the Ger
tif1cate Of Decision
Is Signed by Judges Baxter and Ham
mOnd, and will be Decided by the
Supreme Court Of the United
States at Washington
Next October.

Yesterday the lawyers engaged In prepar-
ing the agreed points in the consolidated
cases of Robert Garrett ct al rs the city of
Memphis ct al, submitted the papers to
Judges Baxter and Hammond for certificate
of decision, and the decree was signed bv
said judges. When entered of record by the
clerk the transcript will be sent to the supreme
court, at Washington, to be finally deter
mined and decided in October next. We
give below the points raised in the cases by
the respective parties to the suits, leaving
out all the legal verbage and lengthy state
ments and introductions:
GENERAL CREDIToRsICAsE.
Robert Garrett City of Memphis ct al Hopkins
Louden same; T8lmadge (. Brown as. same;
The Ahrens Manufacturing company as. same
Farmian Rogers ct al same. In the above
at the close of each statement of ISSUE, the fol-
lowing was written: ION Whicn queSuoh the
opinions of the judges were opposed"
The questions raised, and which will have to be
decided by the United States supreme court, are as
| follows: 49,, o,.
inal bills was filed prior to the twenty Oh jan
uary, 1879 the dare of the act OF the general as.
had or has any Jurisdiction seize and impound the
assets revenues and properties OF the corporation
Second.-whether. the act Of the general assembly
of Tennessee entitled IAN act to repeal the char
neunce the territory and inhabitants thereof to the
| government of theI STATE" passed January n,
e ssaS; a0 0f Memphis niph Is valid law,
or whether the said act is contrary to the constitution
of the State of Tennessee and TO the constitution
VI THird,~Whsther the court has Jurisdiction to
me etc of said municipal corporation when IT ap
peared that the mayor and other officials had aDan-
doned their Offices and duties, when II appears IN 1t
the general assembly had passed series OF acts,
viz: one repeating the charter OF Memphis, the
creating the Taxing District In the same Ter
Iitory and providing government tnereol; lhlr1 70
collect and dispose OF the taxes assed for municoa
Fourth whether If the act Of the general assem-
bly, res ealing the chatter of Memphis be Valid the
CUES aud demands TO and from said municipal cor
poraton, including the claims OF the very complain
| FThhNWhether il said act repeating the charter
declared valid that the effect tbs reof was not TO
exungulsn al depts cues, anu 1a ~ inrisStc
tIon collect the taxes which had been lawfully as
fore the repeal Of It's charter, but which have not
SirfI.NWhether this court has Jurisdiction to en-
force the lien real estate for taxes; when me
said municipal corporation possessed py proceed
| ing in these causes or otherwise. -,
| SeUe7lth-Wbether upon the entire record THIS
court has jurisdiction to entertain the bills 10 grant
az Tsf1htSNWhefher after the taxes already levied
anu uncoleced, due said corporation ana tue other
property named IN the bills shall nave Deen ascer
tsned 10 be insuftcent to pay all the creditors Of
said city, that then this court mas power 70 Drl IN
within The limits of said dissolved corporation By
process. and make assessments against them on
ire tire" cebf found owing from said corporation
pro rata and render judgments and DEGREES against
found due from said dissolved corporation, and en-
force liens against Specific properly against Whlch
| taxes shall have been levied.
| Ninth- WhetheF, when the charter of municipal
corporation has repealed the creditors OF such
cept such as the State through and by its legislative
eDactments, may afford to such creditors
TeHath.-Whether the fourth section OF the act OF
the legislature approved January 81, 1879, chapter
TO- acts OF 1879, repeating the charter OF Mempnls
ture approved on the thrty-hrst of January. 1879.
being chapter Of the act OF the said state 10 I
1879. and an act OF the said legislator approved
March 49, 1879 being chapter 90 of the acts OF the
legislature OF 1879 and particularly sections 4, o.
| as lar as complainants concerned, and
| the creditors who have MADE them-
who was appointed before said act was passed in
violation or the constitutions OF the United states
| and the State of Tennessee, and void.
EIerenth.-Whether If this court has jurisdiction to
| collect back or delinquent taxes, II can do 50 oy
and if So in what court state Federal. must such
suits be brought? or can the court By proceeding IN
taSpaSers 70 come before the court, and pronounce
Judgment against each for the amount found &c
| Wherefore, on motion Of the defendants, by theil
counsel that the points Oh which this disagreement
the direeton Of the judges and certihed under the
court, the supreme court. to be finally decided Il
Of I tho plead nSs and he Questions ion:
on which the dissgreements of opinion hath hap
judges be certified according to the request of tbs
defendants by their counsel and the law IN the case
| made and provided.
It is further ordered that a COPY of said several
bills, and the several demurrers OF the said seSera
Jesso be also made part Of the TRANSCRIPT certify
ing said questions. JOHN BAXTER,
United States Circuit Judge Ior me siIta District
United States District Judge.
DELINQUENT TAXPAYERS CASE.
Another part. of the record shows tha
judgments for back-taxes had been taker
against number of citizens, in which cases
an appeal was prayed for and granted to the
supreme court OF the United States, on Civ
ing the usual bonds within the time pre-
scribed by law.
THE RECEIvER's CASE.
Still another part of the record shows tha
the creditors of Memphis prayed for the ap
pointment of a receiver, and the court ap-
pointed 7. J. Latham as such receivers and
now comes Minor Meriwether, receiver anC
back tax- collector of the State, and moves Il
vacate and set aside the order appointing
said T. J. Latham receiver for the following
reasons:
1. That the act passed b5 the general assembly
and approved by the governor January ~, 1873 a
State, and authorized said MerIwether to eollec
| backtaxes.
| and annul so much OF said order and decree as au
lhorizes said T. J Latham TO collect delinq1en
4
First This court has jurisdiction to collect back
| taxes due from citizens or said municipal CORPORA
lions, either at the Instance OF compliments OF o.
| 7. j. Latham, its receiver
second Because said MeTlwether is alone au-
thoT1Zed, by the laws OF Tennessee TO collect the
same
Third. Because, as to delinquent or back taxes
the bills in these causes in the nature OF gar
nishment bills and said taxes revenues are moi
subject to garnisnment bill in the nature Of az
Fourtn~Because said decree directs said T. J.
Latham such receiver, to collect delinquent taxes
n ted af1S WI ~
laws and statutes In force in Tennessee, said back
taxes levied prior TO the year 1875 payable In
and, because, by the laws of 1874 under which
said MeTiwether holds his appointment, said back
taxes are to be collected differently from the mode
directed by the said order and decres and the sale
motions coming are to be argued at this term, 1t
| CURED questions
| ). Whether the motion to vacate, annul and sci
| aside satd order and decree, appointing T j. La
than receiver, should be sustained and allowed Oh
| oyerruled ana disailowed; and
| 2. Whether so much OF said order and decree ap
| pointing T. j. Latham receiver, as directs him to
proceed to collect delinquent taxes, should be set
aside annulled, vaca,ed or modified for The causes
and stated in support of The second motion
which questions the opinions Of the judges were
| passed.
Hon John Baxter. circuit judge presiding
being of opinion that both said motions should be
| disailowed and OveTruled, and Hon. E s Hammond
district judge being opposed therefore ordered
| adtudged and decreed that both Of said motions be-
disallOwed and Overruled, from which Older the
said MeTiWether prag5 an appeal to the term OF
the supreme court Of the United states, which
prayer is granted, etc.
| Whereupon, on motion of Minor Mcrlwether State
receiver by counsel. that the points on which the
disagreement hath happened, may, during the term.
be stated under the direction OF tie judges ana
tilted under the seal Of the court to the supreme
court to be finally decided, it ordered that the
foregoing pleadngs. motions, etc, be certified ac-
coIding 10 the request OF said Minor MeriweIher by
counsel and the law In the case made and provided
| JOHN BAXTER
United states Circuit Judge of the Sixth District
| & S. HAMMOND,
United States District Judge