The daily state chronicle. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 188?-1891, 1891-02-17
SH ILL RAILROADS BE TAXED
And Thereby Compelled to Bear their
Share of the Burdens of Govern
ment ,
Especial Cor. STATE CHRoNIcLE.l

Especial Cor. STATE CHRoNICLE.l |
GOLDsBoRo, n. c.. Feb. u. 1851
Seven years ago, while editing small
county paper, We closed an article on
this subject in these words: This is
question the practical solution Of which |
may tax to its utmost the wisdom of
our statesmen" AS this question seems
now 10 have forced itself upon the minds |
Of the practical" men OF the State, and
as believe every one should add his
mite to the general treasury of the State,
[ may be excused from concluding that
1t may be his duty to contribute his
thought to the general mass Of intelli-
! gence that will be required to
solve this great question. The
important railroads of the State have
incorporated into their charters provis-
Ions wnlcn practically exempt tnem from
taxation. These are contracts, and the
constitution of the United States pro-
vldes that no State shall impair the OBJ
legation Of contracts. 1t is settled then
that these contracts Of exemption cannot
be impaired The late lamented Chief
Justice Smith said: "While corporations,
favored in their early struggles by the
kindly hand Of State legislation, it would
be reasonable to expect, after success has
crowned their efforts, and their resources
have expanded and become large, would
be willing to contribute to the common
burden resting so heavily upon the tax
able property of the State, and to this
end yield at least some Of their especial
privileges, it is nevertheless our duty to
| Ill +lo, t,1+i 81 ,-It
rom infringement o. abridgement.
1t was about seven years ago that our
great Chief Justice gave expression to
these charitable views of the purposes of
the Railroads, but it seems that he, with
{ al his learning and experience III private
and public life, didn't know the MIND OF
7 i railroad. | asked them in reviewing
the decision in which this eXpressl1l s
found, "But what if they viii not 2"
9 suggested then, that in case the railroads
J.. OF the State should refuse TO surrender
r their exemptions from taxation for q
g compensation that they be compelled tC
DO SO under the great right OF emlnen
: domain.
e The inviolability Of contract is secure
e but this must yield to 1ne public good
|. or rather contracts are made with al
t. implied condition that they are suject t
is the highest law of property called emf
Il nent domain.
Notwithstanding the grant to indi
viduals, the eminent domain, the high
est and most exact idea of property, re
mains IN the government or in the az
ID 5regate body of the people in this soy
ereign capacity; and they have a righ
TO resume the possession Of the prOpert
a. u the manner directed by the constitr
30 ion ana laws Of the State, whenever til
public interest requires It, This rlgt
: IF resumption may b. exercised, nc
&c only where tie safety, Uut also where tt
IL interest, or even the eXpedlency Of Il
state is concerned" Ihis principle
q announced with approval by the 81
Oy creme Court Of tie United States III tt
ny case OF West River Bridge vs. Dix ct
IS Sam, vs.. town BrattebOro, Hawar
IT sos This decision was rendered vii
us reference to the franchise granted in
le charter, and the principles therein q
y nounced will enable the State Of Nor
IS. Carolina to resume her rights. and p
OF the property OF the exempt railroad on
ed par with the mass Of property in t
State. | am free to confess that tt
AZ WOuIu Oo d new appllcdIIOu oi lHo pll
on ciple of eminent domains, but there
try les the beauty Of our system Of laws
Sc there is no new principle involv
ul5 they may readily be applied to any noN
case that may arise. The Court Of a
lld peals Of New York, in applying anoth
sts principle Of law to a new case, uses Il
language 1T is an extension, by
Ter Legislature, Of the principle expressed
to the maxim SIC UTERE TUO Ut ALIA1UM II
uld LAEDAs, to cases to which it had I
es5 been applied, SO, think |, should
1ey principle Of eminent domain be appli
to cases to which it has not heretofo
If a committee is appointed to inves
gate the liability of railroads to taxat
might it not be we'll for the same CO
ms mittee to be authorized to investig
ou' fully the law Of eminent domain, q
devise some means by which it u
practically be applied to these u
the tax paying railroads?
Ia the meantime let no privilege
'nly extended to any such. They have cho
~ to stand upon their contract rights, s
). : ~ there let them stand.
ing W. G. MgNRoE
The