The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1888-12-06
WESTERN & ATLANTIC R. R. COMPANY.
LETTER FROM PRESIDENT JOSEPH
E. BROWN,

m the Gen eral Assembly of Georgia
on the Subject of the Settlement be-
tween the State and the Lessees-
The Question of Betterments, Taxes,
ptc.. Discussed - Arbitration Pro-
posed.
PRESIDENTS OFFICE,
WESTERN AND ATLANTIC r. R. Co.,
ATLANTA, GA, Nov. %, 1855. J
tn the Members of the General Assembly:
GrNTLEMEN-As l have no means of
holding official communication with you, l
will send this communication to his excel
lancv the governor, and ask him to do me
the favor to transmit a copy of it to each
branch of the general assembly. The lease
~ the Western and Atlantic Railroad Com
nanv expires on Dec. %, 1890. Your sue
rressor-s will be elected in October, and meet
in November prior to the expiration of the
lease The time between the meeting of the
General assembly AID the expiration of the
Iaase will be too short for action in matter
81 complicated and important. l take it
for granted, therefore, that the heavy re-
snonsibility of making proper disposition of
Ike road for the future, either by sale or
lease. will devolve upon this present general
assembly.
am not an applicant for a renewal of
the present lease. More than one-half of
the whole number Of original lessees are
now dead, and | know of no one of the sur
vivors who desires to become a member
of the new company that may purchase or
lease the road.
Our sole object is to carry out our con-
tract with the state of Georgia in the
strctest good faith, and to make an honest,
fair and lust settlement with the state, on
ali questions of interest where differences of
opinion may exist.
AS communicated to your predecessors,
the lessees claim that they have a right to
stand upon the contract made be-
tween the state of Georgia and our com
many at the time of the original lease, and
to return the road in the same condition we
received it. 1t is true we could not afford
to run it down to as low a condition as it
was in when we received it, and still run
safely, but we could run it down much
below what it now is. We think it would
be great deal better for the state. and all
its citizens and taxpayers, that the road
should be kept in its present excellent con-
dltion at the time when it is offered in the
market for sale or lease.
We entertain no doubt that the state
could get much better terms by disposing
of the road i'll good condition than she
would be able to get If it were in the dilapi-
dated condition it was when 1t was turned
over to the present lessses. l am aware
that there is no provision In the act of the
legislature or the contract providing for the
payment of bettermeuts. but there is
provision that we are only bound to return
the road in as good condition as we received
it, and we claim that the state of Georgia
has no right to take the road from us in its
improved condition without compensating
us for the improvements. Neither the act
of the legislature, the justice of the case
nor the contract would justify such action
on the part of the stats. / am aware that
there are those who contend that we are
entitled to nothing for betterments, that
we are bound to keep the road up in high
state of repair until the end Of
tie lease, and then, notwithstand-
ing the plain provisions Of the
contract to the contrary, that we are bound
to turn it back to the state in that condi-
ton, without any compensation for tho i'm
provements. We cannot give our assent to
that view Of the question.
In addition to our claim for betterments,
we have what we conceive to be a legal,
equitable and just claim against the state
for taxes paid by this company to the state
of Tennessee, which the state of Georgia,
and not the lessees, was bound to pay.
Part of the eleventh section of the act of
the legislature under which the lease was
made, is in these ords:
And said company shall have the same
exemptions, privileges, immunities, rights
and guarantees, and shall be subject to the
same liabilities, disabilities and public bur-
dens of said railroad companies last men
toned the Georgia Railroad Company, the
Central Railroad Company, and the Macon
and Western Railroad Company and no
more, in all cases where this act is silent
and has made no provision on the subject
AS you will see, this subjected the COM
rany Of lessees to the same public burdens
e., l. L. ID
Ing Company and the Central Railroad ard
Banking Company, and the Macon and
Western Railroad Company were subject.
AT later period it was claimed by the
agents of the state that under the term
public burdens the Western and Atlantic
Railroad Company was liable to pay tax as
1t is paid on other property of the state. A
litigation ensued, and it was carried Co the
supreme court Of the state, and it was ruled
by majority of the court, that as the three
railroad companies above mentioned, under
their charters, were only bound to pay the
state Of Georgia one-half of one per cent
upon their net incomes, and as the Western
and Atlantic Railroad Company is liable to
the same public burdens, and no more, that
the Western and Atlantic Railroad Com
pany, by its contract with the state, was
liable only to pay tax of one-half of one
per cent. on their net incomes, ahd no more
DhoH consequently, tuO OdSo was
again carried to the supreme court, and by
a full bench the same ruling was made.
linen the supreme court of Georgia has
solemnly ruled that the Western and At
lantic Railroad Company, by it's contract,
IS liable to no public burdens except a tax
OF one-half of one per cent. upon its net in
comes
Now it is well known that a portion of
the road lies in Tennessee, and that that
state imposes tax upon that portion Of it
within tennessee, at the same rate imposed
upon all other railroad companies. That
TAX has to be paid by somebody, or the por-
tion OF the road in Tennessee is liable to be
seized and sold by the officers of that state
The lessees have notified the governor of
georgia, over and over again, that the state
oI tennessee is imposing this tax, and the
company has constantly claimed that the
STATE OF Georgia is bound to pay it, just as
the landlord is bound to pay the tax in
every case where he leases property. If the
!srmer leases his farm to lessee, unless
there is a special contract that the lessee is
70 pay the tax, the tax falls upon the owner,
and he must pay it, so as to protect the title
40 40 MS property and the possession Of
s rue lessee during the period of the lease.
Ane same Is true in city or
Town where a business house or dwelling
mouse is rented. Unless there is a special
contract to the contrary, the lessor or
Vmner Is bound to pay the tax, so as to pro-
,oct The property i'll the possession of the
Iessee during the term of the lease; and it
eeefIs TO me there can be no intelligent dis