The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1883-03-29
The Railroad War.

Inc Railroad war
| ADVERTISING THE PROPERTY OF RAIL
ROADS TO PAY TAyES-CORPORATION
PUT ON THE SAME BASIS AS INDIyID-
UALs MONEY NOT COUPONS MUST BE
PAID.
Quite breeze has been created hereabouts
within the past week, by printed hand bills
posted in conspicuous places. announcing the
sale of certain of the rolling stock of five
different railroads, by Jno. Z. Hamilton, Treas
urer of Augusta county. who has also been
appointed special collector for the purpose.
The advertisements in full will be found in
another column. The taxes placed in the
hands of Treasurer Hamilton for collection,
and for which levies have been made, amount
to $25 1890, made up as follows:
Chesapeake 81 Ohio. ......... $l6999 10
! valley. S,ooS ~
| Winchester u S'rasburg. l.52UOO
! S.rasburg d Harrlsonburg.... 3,93O40
Winchester G. Potomac. 915.72
$95,42s.20
The entire tax on all the railroads OF tho
State amounts TO something over quart er OF
a million dollars. This large amount has
hitherto been paid in coupons. Under the
Riddleberger bill, which has been declared
constitutional by the highest Judicial tribunal,
the taxpayer must tender the money W ith the
coupons The money is held until the gen
uineness of each of the coupons is established
in court, and upon that genuineness being
established the money is refunded and coupons
received Last week several of the repre-
sentatiyes of the railroads rendered the cou-
pons without the money. They were promptly
refused, and the officers of the law were in
structed to dstrain the property of all roads
which had not paid, and from its sale realize
| the amounts due the State. The manner in
which the coupons were rendered points ire
sistibly to the conclusion that the bondhoders
| together with the railroads expect to resist TO
the utmost the attempt to prevent the prac-
tical receiyabilty OF coupons for taxes. II
was understood that The movement of the
railroads was to be followed up by other cor
porai ions, who would make sinlilar tender,
AMI if the coupons were refused, which, of
course, they will he, that these corporations
expected to let the State proceed TO levy upon
their property for the demands due the Com
mon wealth by them, In word the plan is
supposed 10 he substantially that recommended
| by w l.. Royall the counsel for the English
bondholders, which has already been made
public.
THE POSITION OF THE RAILROADS.
| The attitude of he railroads may be gen
orally inferred from the position taken by the
authorities Of the 8. d Q. and Valley roads
| That position as given by Mr.. Samuel Spencer,
second vice President of the B. & o. and
| President of the Valley road, and published in
the Baltimore american, is in substance as
| follows:
| In the fist place, the four corporations
| forming the Valley line from Harpers Ferry
,, to Staunton. with the exception of so much of
| the line as is iu the State of West Virginia,
| are assessable for taxes in Virginia The
Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company, as the
lessee of these corporations, has rendered to
the authorities of Virginia tax coupons, and
fractional parts in silver, in full payment of
such taxes, within The time specified by law
| for the payment OF taxes, which have been
refused. The attempt to collect by lew OH
property OF the road raised, in the opinion of
the Baltimore and Ohio authorities, is consti-
lutionai question which, when decided by the
| state court. can be carried through all the
| courts to the Supreme Court of the United
States. The point here, they think, differs
altogether from the point recently decided,
and great confidence is felt that the Supreme
Court will maintain the inviolabity OF con-
| tracts The United States Supreme Court in
| its late decision. did not decide that the leg
| islature of Virginia could violate this con-
tract with its creditors, but simply decided
| that the Coupon-killer bill only changed the
mode Of redress which should be sought to
compel the state to comply with its engage
ments. President Spencer of the Valley Rail
| road, held, first, that the Virginia authorities
could not attach the property of the Baltimore
and Ohio Railroad Company for the non pay
ment of taxes due from the Valley Railroad
Company, and he has notified the attaching
party that the Baltimore and Ohio Company
will hold him personally and officially re-
sponsibe for all damages and secondly, that
the Valley Railroad Company will not pay its
taxes due in Virginia in money, as it takes eX-
ception to the Interpretation of the law
placed upon the Coupon-killer bill by the
| Virginia authorities.
| For definite exposition of the law, as held
| by the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company,
| Tile american representative was referred TO
Mr.. John X. Cowan counsel of the Baltimore
and Ohio, who gave his opinion as follows:
THE Supreme Court of the United States
lately decided, in the case of Antoni vs.. Green
how, that Coupon-kiler No. /, being the act
ofthe Virginia Legislature of January A. 1882,
was valid. This act simply took away from
the coupon holder the right to mandamus to
compel the tax collector to receive the cou-
pons in payment of state taxes. No other
question was decided by the Supreme Court,
but the simple one that taking away the single
remedy by mandamus did not impair the obi
CATION of the contract. Coupon-kiler No. 9,
| being the act of January 26, 1882, went into
| force December 1, 1882. This act takes away
all remedies from the coupon holder, except
the single right TO sue the collector after he
had paid his taxes in cash, and prohibits the
| collector oftaxes from receiving tax-receivable
coupons in payment of taxes due the state.
| The railroad companies and other parties
| have rendered TO the proper state officers tax
| receivable coupons in payment OF their taxes.
] These officers have declined, in accordance
with the act last mentioned, and thereupon
| the officers proceed to seize upon the property
| of the railroad companies, and will attempt TO
! sell the same in payment of the taxes The
| Supreme Court has held that the state must
receive these coupons in payment of taxes
and that no llqulQat0n winch endeaVOrS TO
prevent this is valid. The railroad companies
therefore claim that the late decision of the
Supreme Court does not apply to the present
| case at all. Upon the contrary, they main
tain that the Supreme Court decision directly
sustalns the validity of the coupons as q tax
paying instrument and as valid tender and
that the slate officer who seeks to take prop
erty for taxes, after @ valid tender of coupons
has been made to him, is trespasser, and the
courts will prevent him from Selling such
property"
THE POSITION OF THE STATE.
In response to an inquiry as to the power
of the State TO enforce the collection of money
as provided under the Riddleberger act instead
of coupons, Coy. Cameron in recent inter-
view, said:
81 have seen proposition 10 deprive the
State of its revenues by combination of the
bondholders and corporations to resist the law
as it stands on our statute books and has been
expounded by the Supreme Court of the
United States. No such conspiracy will be
allowed to proceed in Virginia willie l am
Governor, with the powers conferred by the
Constitution and the laws. The proposition
is revolution. but there is only needed to meet
it the plain and usual methods of judicial