The Newberry herald and news. (Newberry, S.C.) 1884-1903, 1888-03-08
AN IMPORTANT DECISION.
"ndge Norton Decides that Township
subscriptions to Railroads is
Unconstitutional.
IKeOwee Courier.1


by Judge Norton at the recent term of
court at Abbeville. 1t is important to
taxpayers, as limiting the power Of
subscriptions to railroads by townships,
denying such power in the. case at
issue on two grounds: first, because a
township, not being corporate body,
the Act chartering the Greenville and
. Port Royal Railroad and amendatory
Acts chartering the road as body cor
porate, attempts to create township a
corporate body with the sole power ard
for the sole purpose of enabling it to
subscribe to the stock Of another corpo-
ration, the railroad. This he holds
violates Article 2, Section 20 of the
Contribution, that 'every Act or reso-
luton having the force of law shall re-
late to but one subject, and that shall
be expressed in the title" Second,
were this point successfully controvert-
ed the Act would still be obnoxious to
Article 9, Section of the State Con-
stitution. Within the meaning of this
provision Ninety-Six is not township
and the purpose as to it, subscription
to the railroad, is not corporate pur-
pose within the meaning of the provi-
sions. The two Acts so far as they
authorize subscription by townships
tc the railroad in question, and so far a.
they purport to incorporate any town
ship or townships, are declared 10 be
unconstitutional and void and taxes
levied under such Acts are illegal. The
following is the full text of the deci-
sion:
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA,
ABBEvILLE COUNTY,
IN TIE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
Jefferson Floyd, ct al, Prfs,l Complaint
against
J. Watdlaw Perrin, TreaSur- : Tor
urer Of Abbeville County,
This action was begun by the plain
tiffs on the 2sd February, 1887, under
Section 26S of the General Statutes, to
recover three hundred dollars and five
cents Of taxes paid by the plaintiffs
under protest, to meet the interest on
the bonds issued by the County Com
missioners of said county as corporate
agents of Ninety-Six Township under
the provisions ofan Act entitled "An
Act to charter the Greenvile and Port
Royal Railroad Company" passed 23d
December, 1882; and of an Act entitled
"An,Aet to smend an Act entitled AN
Act to charter the Greenville and Port
Royal Railroad Company" passed
oath December, 1885, which tax plain
tifs allege has been illegally assessed
and collected; because, first sundry of
the conditions precedent to the issuing
of the bonds have not been performed;
second, the railroad company has loeat-
ed it's linein direction not authorized
and has thereby forfeited its charter;
and, third, the Act authorizing the
subscription is i'll violation ofArticle2 2,
Section 20 and Article 8, Section ofthe
Constitution of this State, and askjudg-
ment, declaring the said Act and
amendment unconstitutional, the asses
ment hereunder illegal and for the
repayment ofthe sums paid by the plain
tiffs hereunder. .
The defendant alleges that all of the
conditions precedent to the issuing OF
the bonds were duly performed and
pleads res 9ssc1icot0 as to the validity OF
the bonds.
. tits we'll settled that in the hands OF
an innocent holder, the recitation in the
bonds of the performance of conditions
precedent, is binding on the taxpayers
liable to their payment, but that in the
hands ofpersons with notice, the per.
Torrance of conditions precedent may
beinquired into. The defendant is en-
titled to whatever defence the holders
ofbonds COULD make. The bond-holders
not having been made defendants, the
burden of the proof is upon plaintiffs to
show that the tax should not be collect.
ed. In the absence Of evidence I must
assume that the bonds recite the per.
formance ofall the conditions precedent
to their issue and are in the hands Of
innocent holders.
The plaintiffs are therefore estopped
from showing that the conditions prece,
dent have not been performed. They
IRE not estopped from eontesting the
validity ofthe bonds on other grounds
The charter Of the railroad company car
be declared forfeited only by proceeding
directly instituted for that, purpose
Plaintiffs therefore fail on that ground
The Act under consideration beingt K
charter railroad company also give:
power to counties, townships, &C., K
subscribe to its stock in a certain way
and enacts that for the purposes ofth'
Act townships ''shan be, and they art
hereby declared to be bodies polite anc
corporate, and vested with the necessa
ry powers to carry out the provisions o
this Act" Authority establishes tn
validity of the Act as to municipal cor
porations already in existence, such a
counties, cities, etc.
The questions therefore seem to me t,
be-
lst. Is township a municipal corpo
ration?
I'd. fla township be not corpora
ton, is its creation so foreign to the It'll
of the Act under consideration as to b.
considered distinct subject?
Cd 70 q to1y-pShip },o q npnpici,,al cOr