The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1892-01-05
THE SUPREME COURT
Missouri Tax Law About Express
Companies Valid.
THE CASE OF YAKIMA CITY
The Northern Pacific is Not Bound to Main
tain a Station Three-Three
Justices Dissent.


supreme court to-day affirmed the decision
of the lower court in the suit brought by
the Pacific Express company against James
M. Herbeat and John M. Wood, auditor
and attorney general respectively of Mis-
souri,. By this suit the express company
sought to restrain and enjoin the collection
of a tax of 50 on each 500 of receipts, lev
led by the act of the state legislature
against express companies doing business
within the state. The company's bill at
tackled the constitutionality OF the act
as an interference with interstate
commerce, and declared it violated
the fourteenth amendment giving equal
protection to all and also as contrary 10 the
provision of the Missouri state constitution
requiring all laws shall be uniform. This
court, in an opinion by Justice Lamar, says
the contention that the tax is levied upon
interstate commerce is unsound. 1t says the
tax does not relate to Interstate business,
but entirely to state business, and is ex-
pressly limited to receipts for business done
entirely within the state and that 1t was
not the intention of the legislature to inter
fere with or tax interstate commerce IN
any way whatever. The her points
raised, it also holds, are not well taken for
he reason the tax applies equally to all
companies doing express business.
! The United States supreme court rem
! dered a decision to-day in favor of the
Northern Pacific railway company in the
mandamus suit brought against it by tue
Territory of Washington ex rel Hiram
Dustin, prosecuting attorney of Yakima
county. 10 compel the raj way to maintain
a station and stop its trains at Yakima
City,
The bill set forth that Yakima City at
the time of the building of the road was the
county seat and largest town in that
county, and the object Of the railroad COM
pany in refusing TO make Yakima City a
railway station was to ruin the town and
enhance the value of the townsite of North
| Yakima, which 1t had located on unim-
proved lands belonging to the railway com
pany. Justice Gray, in the op MON of the
court, says a writ of mandamus 10 compel q
railroad corporation to do particular act
in constructing its road or buildings or in
running its trains, can be issued only wher
there is a specific legal duty on it's part tC
do that act and clear proof of a breach Of
duty. The courts have so held, even il
the matter of establishing a station
at the terminus of road. The difficulties
in Issuing man damus are much increased
when it is sought to compel a road to stoI
trains at particular place. The Location
of stations and warehouses for receiving
} and delivering passengers and freight in
, wolves comprehensive view of the inter
, est Of the pubic as well as of the corpora
ton and the consideration of many crcum
, stances concerning the amount of bushes
and convenience of a particular location
from which complaint comes, are more ap
9 propriate 10 be determined by the director
of company, or in case of the abuse o
their discretion by the legislature or b.
administrative boards entrusted by tn
, legislature with that duty than by ordi
: nary iuGicial tribunals
9 Justice Gray says the charter of the com
e pany does not impose any specific duty a
n to the maintenance and size of stations
n and that to compel the directors 10 be cor
trolled by the courts by Writs of mandarin
q in establishing stations would be incon
O sistent with many previous decisions. Tn
f findings below, he says, show people Twin
d in the surrounding country considered as
community would be better accomm odatet
n at North Yak ma than at Yakimi City
9 The company denies the fraudulent inter
:, chrrged by Yakima City, and it was nj
h found by the jury. The fact that the tow
+ of North Yakima was laid out by the com
: pany on its ov n land cannot impair the il
l., nabitants of that town.
Justice Brewer rendered vigorous or
, dissent, which was concurred in by Ju:
n tees Harlan and Field. He said when IL
= railroad built it's line it found city a
y ready established, the county seat and tt
largest place along its roap for many mile
Every public interest required static
] should be established there. Instead I'll
:, railroad company went three or four mile
u further along and laid out a town on i
lie own land. No reason was given for such
1T course. The railroad neglected and aba
a doned its public duty to subServe its pl
yate ends. Anyone who knows the proce
- Of railway building knows it is a commc
~ thing to build up town and pull dow
another in this manner. An establishe
u town offers an insufficient bonus for a st
i ton sometimes. he dissenting justice
he said, thought the courts had suffice
power to restrain in such proceedings.
IL The court sustained the law Of the sta
~ of South Carolina, which provides that Il
. expenses of the state railway commissi
- shall be borne by railroads doing busiDe
" within the state, each road being taxed
- proportionate share of the expenses
ie maintaining the commission ON basis
~ mileage within the state.