Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1880-06-26
the BULLION TAX SUITS.
Revival or she r'reesedisss - Gel.
Iscs ahs Psaalsies lscarrsd -
enc Bssanna Aines-Hisssry 81
she Cases.

In the District Court yesterday remit
ti,urs we're fled in the four cases against
the bonanza mines in which some two
years ago last May q compromise wa
effected and the penalties for nonpay-
msnt Of the tax RENTED.
The suits were originally commented
by the State for the recovery Of about
s2O9. 900 unpaid bullion tax and legal
penalties for non.paymsnt. While pro.
csedings we're pending in the District
Court Q suit was brought BY Q stock.
holder OF the companies named Forbes
against Gracey. then Assessor. enjoin-
ing him from collecting the tax. This
suit was brought In the United States
Circuit Court and was won by the State
in that Court and appealed BY Forbes to
the Supreme Court Of the United States
ct Washington.
While proceedings we're still pending
in that case. . compromise was offered
by the companies whereby In considsra.
ton Of renting the penalties incurred
BY the non-paymsnt OF the tax the com,
panies agreed to pay tho tax and $6'Voo
District Attorneys fees. This oder OF
settlement was accepted BY the County
Commissioners with the consent OF the
District Attorney and associate counsel.
Attorney General Kittrsll was brought
up from Carson and agreed to the com.
promise, aud General CLARK. who had
been retained by the State to help pros
ecute the cases. telegraphsd an acqui'
sscence in the arrangement. The com.
promise was thus agreed upon. the stip-
ulation for judgment for the amounts
claimed. less the penalties, duly signed.
and thereon the District Court entered
Judgment against the companies. which
was at once paid. The amount was
about sl74.000.
This settlement was at the time
regarded a. an exceedingly favorable
termination Of Q very ugly complication
Of affairs in which everybody in the
State was interested; for, while the most
OF the money came into the treasury o!
the county Of Storey, q large sum
belonged to the State.
But closely upon the contamination
OF this settlement came information that
the case OF Forbes vs. Grscey had been
decided in favor Of the State. This
brought about q change OF feeling 10
certain directions in relation to the com
promise. some asserting that the oonpa-
mics had received an intimation OF the
nature Of the forthcoming decision at
the time the compromise was offered.
Under these circumstances, the District
Attorney Of Storey county. notwith.
standing the stipulations OF compromise
and the judgment Of the Court confirm
ing It,. took an appeal in all the cases to
the Supreme Court from that Judgment
and from rulings previously made in the
cases.
The Legislature Of Nevada at Its Sos.
sion in 1889 passed Q law lesalizing
the action Of the County Commissioners
Of Storey county in entering into the
compromise.
The Supreme Court, in the earlier part
Of this month rendered . decision in the
case. In which 1t was ordered that the
judgments appealed from be reversed,
directing the District Court to override
demurrsrs fled by the defendants to the
complaints Of the plaintiff. and allowing
said defendants Q reasonable time In
which to answer said complaints.
Yesterday. when the remittiturs were
fled, the plaintiff asked to amend Its
complaints and the District Court al.
lowed Ave days in which to file said
amendments, and ten days thereafter
for the defendants to answer said amend.
cd complaints.
The amount OF the penalties is about
$35, 900, and the outlook Ii that the
companies wiz DO compelled to pay
them. Still. there may DO delays; for
the cases are OF such Q nature that they
may be carried to the Supreme Court OF
the United States, which always has two
or three years. business ahead OF II.
At the time the compromise was
effected and the money paid, the county
and schools needed the coin badly, and
heavy taxation was imminent; hence,
the offer to pay the amount a. per stip-
ulation Of once and to continue to pay
the bullion tax Is II became due. entered
largely into the consideration which
moved to the acceptance Of the otsr.
Had the matter not been taken up BY
the Supreme Court at Warrington BY
consent Of the companies and out OF its
regular order on the calendar, 1t 10
doubtful II the original case Of Forbes
.g.;pat Gvacev vould have been decided