The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1880-02-25

MINORITY REPORT SUBMITTED BY FRANK
J. M'GEE OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE.

J. MGEE OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE.
Mr. SPEAKER:-The majority ofthe Joint
Select Committee of the Senate and House
of Representatives appointed TO consider
whether the Mobile and Ohio Railroad is
subject to taxation under its Charter, and
to consider propositions from said railroad
looking towards settlement of differences
between it and the State, have submitted
report and a bill Herewith, and, as one of
that Committee who does not agree with the
majority in all their conclusions. l must dis
sent from the action of that majority in re-
commencing the passage or the bill. While
il may be fact that the railroad under its
charter is exempt from taxation, am of
opinion that the matter should be settled by
the Courts. Neither the showing made by
the Commissioners, nor that made by the
railroad settles the question fully in my
mind that the road is exempt from taxation,
though the road has decided advantage on
account of the third section of its charter.
The question presents itself whether the
amounts deducted from the earnings I'M
der the head of permanent Improvements,
and other expenses, should be taken from
said earnings of the railroad and thus re-
duce the per cent. of earnings. Under this
state of things the railroad could go on from
year to year deducting such amounts from
and thus evade taxation forever.
The fact that the State has obtained
judgment in our Supreme Court for the
amount of the loan made in 1867 to-wit
the sum of 5000 600 with interest, making
an aggregate sum of 1897, 500, should GER
tainly be construed favorbIy to the affirm
snce of that judgment by the Supreme
Court of the United States. The Mobile
and Ohio Railroad has enjoyed immunity
from taxation for more than thirty years, a
fact which the Legislature that granted the
Charter certainly never contemplated. To
settle the matter and avoid expensive liti-
CATION, and in consideration of the fact that
the railroad in 1864 paid the loan to the
State in Confederate money, l am of the
opinion that a compromise based on the
dismissal of the suit now pending, and an
unconditional surrender by the railroad
of the third section of its Charter, would be
both expedient and desirable; but so long as
the State has this hold upon the railroad it
strikes me that it would be bad policy to
let go that hold under the Conditions re-
commended by majority of the Committee.
There is another fact which causes me to
oppose the recommendations of the majority
of the Committee, and that is, if the bill
recommended should become a law, the
counties through which the railroad runs
would get no separate benefit from the fund
accruing under its provisions. This COM
promise, ifagreed to, should be in the nature
of a tax on the railroad, and the counties
through which it passes should get one-half
of the fund just as the counties through
which other railroads run, do under the
present law Should the State obtain judg-
ment in the Supreme Court of the United
States for the amount demanded, and not be
able to collect that judgment, foreclosure
of the mortgage would naturally follow, and,
as a consequence, the Charter of the road
would be forfeited, and the Objectionable
the third section, would scarcely be
engrafted into new Charter. This would
place the Mobile and Ohio Railroad on the
same footing with other roads in this State,
and the State would be in such a position
as to enforce any measure towards the col
lection of taxes or any other demand.
For the foregoing and other reasons not
herein set forth, dissent from the report of
the majority of the. Committee, and shall
oppose the passage of the proposed cOmpro-
mise bill. Respectfully,
FRANK c.. MCGEE,
of the House Committee.