The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1881-03-03
RAILROAD TRAVELLING AGENTS.
The County COurt Decides They are
Not Subject to the DrHIn-
mers' Tax.


The reporter made mention last week of an
important case on trial in the county court
and to-day gives Judge Burk's decision on
same. Messrs. JEFF Thompson, P. r. Rodgers,
j. r. Merrifeld, NJ. L. Hsyden,J j.. A. Will
son, ID. @. Brady, CASTOR Msslier, r. r.
Robins, T. S. Spear, 4. d. Russell, H. p.
Hughes, S. 0. Hemmeuway, j. T. Hogan
and other representatives Of various railroad
lines, we're indie under the drummers' tax
law, which has been thought to include
every solicitor of business. 1t was of great
importance to the roads az an adverse de-
cision would have forced the payment Of a
heavy annual tax.
Messrs Morgan & Gibbs represented the
foreign lines, and MIR. Foster, of Denison.
the Missouri, Kansas & Texas and Missouri
Pacific railroads. Very able arguments
we're made on the proper construction of the
statute; and Messrs Morgan & Gibbs and
Foster reviewed the history of its passage to
show that its enactment was in the interest
of wholesale merchants ut home, and could
not have been intended for railroad SCENTS.
JUDGE BURKE's DECISION.
The State of Texas VS.. j. r. Merrifeld, in
county court, Dallas county. The defendant
in this case was indicted by the grand jury Of
Dallas county on the 10th dsy Of Novcm Der,
1880, as u drummer and solicitor of trade"
alleging that Gas such he solicited business
and trade, and passengers and travel for the
Ohio & Mississippi railroad company in Dsl-
las county without first having paid the tax
levied by law upon said occupation of drum
mer and solicitor of trade" ETC., etc. The
defendant by attorney files his motion to
aussh on the grounds, LIST. That the bill does
not charge any offense under tho statutes of
the state. I'd. That the statute under which
tho defendant stands charged is unconstitu-
tional and void. This motion involves the
construction of that portion of Art. 1866
revised statutes, relating to what is common
" denomnated tho "drummers' tax" This
article provides that "sn annual occupation
tax Of two hundred dollars shall be
collected from every Commercial traveller,
drummer, salesman or solicitor Of trade by
sample or otherwise, provided that such p,r-
son shall not be required to pay the Same if
| the person, firm, or association of persons
represented by him, or for whom he is solic-
| iting trade shall have paid merchant occu-
patton tax of $2C0'' After adding other
provisions, il concludes by declaring that "a
| merchant in the meaning of this act 10 any
person, firm, or association OF persons en-
gagged in buying and selling goods, wares and
merchandise Of any kind whatsoever" The
| question then presents itself, LIZ the deten-
| dant s representative of snch 'perzon, firm,
! OF association of persons" rs comes within
the meaning and intent of the legislature.
aud upon whom an occupation tax of $500
! has been levied? In II Texas, 402, Chief
| Justice Hemshjll, IN speaking # the con-
| 10 dvxrE ~. f.tI hAff h.
courts, Gays: That toe intention of the iegis-
lsture is to DO deduced from the Who'll, and
every part of "A statute when com
pared together; that when { . words
are not expici, the intention is to Jscolec ed
! from the occasion and necessi'y of the law
and from the mischief and objects and
remedy in view, aud the Intention is to be
presumed according 10 what IS consonant TO
reason and good discretion"
In 18th Texas, $40, Judge Wheeler says (;
an here words arc very general 1t 10 the duty
of courts TO construe the act with references
to the history, SO rs 10 avoid absurdity and
give effect to the weli-known meaning and
Intention"
What then was the true intention Of toe
legialatur in imposing this tax? What Is
the history of the act
Our state merchants were compelled TO pay
| not only their az VAiorem TAX, Out III aoui-ivh
an occupation tax, and at the same time com
pete with merchants from other states repre-.
| scented by drummers, commercial travellers.
etc., who contributed absolutely nothing TO
the support of our stste government. To
remedy in part this injustice and place the
merchants of Texas upon at least equal
terms with those from other states.
the legislature passed the "drummers'
tax law" A careful residing OF the act viii,
Il seems, convince anyone that it relates
slono 10 merchants in tue general accepts-
ton and meaning of the term, and that the
true intent and meaning of the legislature
was 10 regulate and equalize taxation upon
| this class.
To hold railroad corporations in this or
other states or the agents of such soliciting
psssenzers OF trade over their respective lines
70 be merchants within the meaning and
purvie~ Of this act would, in the language
I of Judge Wheeler, not "svOio absurdiiy."
IL is no. perceived how even the most
strained constraciiOn of the oct could en-
brace this class. For the reason then that
toe Indictment charges no offense against the
laws Of ibis state The motion 10 quAsh u sus :
tanned and csuse dismissed