The Breckenridge news. (Cloverport, Ky.) 1876-1955, 1890-11-26
The Railroad Tax and the Court of
Claims.

Judge Board, the County Attorney,
said wisely to the County Court at its
recent session, that the application OF
Messrs. w. V. McCracken & Co. to have
a tax levied, under the charter of the
Louisville, Hardinsburg & Western Rail
way Company, on the tax district which
voted subscription of sixty thousand
dollars TO the railroad company, was the
most important question that had ever
come before the Court for its considera-
ton. The question simply of whether
or not the County Court should employ
counsel to aid the County Attorney in
advising the County Court as to its duty
under the law, was the question, and the
only question at the time, under consid-
Grafton.
The representatives of one side of the
lawsuit now pending in the Circuit
Court (the side of the plaintiff) earnest
ly, and with apparent bitterness, cp-
posed sucha step on the part of the
County Court. They insisted that their
side had counsel familiar with the case
and all its steps from the beginning,
who were ready and willing to aid the
Court in finding what is their duty in
respect to the question, and suggested
that Mr.. Lewis, one of their attorneys,
was in the county, but few miles from
the Courthouse, and his presence for
that purpose could be had in few
hours. As result of their clamor, the
whole question was postponed till the
January term of the Court.
The mind of the Court was evidently
to proceed in the matter advisedly, and
to do what the law makes it their duty
to do. They seemed to draw clearly the
proper distinction between the County
Court representing the county of Breck-
enridge, and the, railroad company and
W. V. McCracken & Co, who are con-
tending to the death in lawsuit with
one another. They seemed further to
recognize that advice coming from the
attorney for w. V. McCracken & Co., or
liOll lllC dttOluCl iOl inc pldlhllll III
that lawsuit, was not the advice they
ought to follow. That proposition was
too plain for the Court to make any mis-
take about.
1t would have been highly presumptu-
Gus in w. V. McCracken q Co., and
would have been too reprehensible to
toll obout if thar ottornnys bod mo
posed to be the counsel of the County
Court. Yet this very thing the other
side of the lawsuit proposed that their
attorneys should be. Assuming appar-
emily that their side of the lawsuit is
Breckenridge county, and the whole
county, and nothing but the county,
they, in effect, ask the County Court to
be their partners in the death-struggle
fight with w. V. McCracken q Co. The
Court did not see it in that light, but
were willing for those gentlemen to be
reminded that they are not Breckenridge
county, nor are they Breckenridge coun-
ty along the line of the railway, nor yet
are they the tax district. We may sup
pose they are the town of Hardinsburg
but we must be allowed further to sup
pose that the members of the County
Court felt that their duties require them
not to forget the interests of Brecken-
ridge county in favor of one locality in
the county.
The County Court did not propose to
take part in the quarrel between Har-
dinsburg and w. V. McCracken & Co.
How to keep out of that quarrel is the
question they are struggling with. They
wanted counsel, their especial counsel,
whose only duty would be to advise
them as a Court what, when and how to
do in this matter, which the County At
torney informs them is a very weighty
matter. They tremblingly intimate, and
with bated breath, speak of engaging
their own counsel for this purpose, but
it gives Offense to these gentlemen, the
plaintiffs in the lawsuit, and the County
Court Immediately became "like unto
the similitude" of political ward meet
ing. ave can advise YOU" they cry.
ave know all about it.. Our learned at
tOrney is near by at this moment, and
we can have him here in short order"
The railroad attorney insists, on the
other hand, that they don't know all
about it, and reads charters and statutes,
and says his fellows know all about it,
The Court confesses it don't know any
thing about it, but wants to find out.
The Court ought not to have needed
the objections to the employment of
competent counsel to investigate closely
the subject of where the power is lodged
by the railroad charter to levy the de-
sired tax-whether in the County Court
as whole, or whether in the County
Judge and the two magistrates in the
tax district-and advise them. The
counsel would have required time to do
so, and this would have necessitated