The Caucasian. (Clinton, N.C.) 188?-1913, 1892-03-10

ifs branch lines have been conxtruc-
ted under The authority of that act.
l. The act of 1883 See. IS pro
vides: "if The company shall 70,
have completed The main road from
Wilmington to Raleigh in twelve
years thereafter, then The company
shall forf.ii 50 much Of the rights
and privileges hereby created As
confer upon The said company the
power Of extending the said read
above the point al which IL shall
then b. constructed; bus they shall
no, forfeit their property ard
privileges in any manner ~ 20 much
Of The road as as they have com-
pleted." None Of the branch roads
were either begun or finished with
in said twelve years. One Of six
teen miles in length was built in
1860 and the others siace the adop-
ton of the Constitution Of 1868
which forbids the grant Of excmp-
ton from taxation by requiring
that taxation shall be uniform and
ad raiorem. If the branches were
IAN integral part of the main line
their construction was no; author
lied after the lapse Of twelve years.
If they do not fall under that limi.
tation il is questionable whether
the right to build them was not lost
under the general act by non user
for two years after completion Of
the main line. Act 1886 chapter
10; Code section 6Ss, G94. The
branch roads of the plaintiff are no,
only not exempt from taxation, but
it is not clear that their construc-
ton has been under warrant Of law.
If it be conceded that the construc-
ton of branch roads was authorized
after such lapse of time, they could
in contemplation of the charter be
only such as are short feeders to the
main line. The branch road from
Halifax to Kinston, whose taxation
is here Immediately in controversy,
is eighty-five miles in length, nearly
parallel to the main line and con-
Meeting with FIVE other railroads,
and is certainly not such branch;
nor is the Wilson branch, some $50
miles in length, about as long as the
main line, with l25 miles in this
State) and which is to be used here
after practically as the main line
of the plaintiffs traffic. The failure
of the State to collect taxes cannot
be taken as an abandonment Of its
right. No such presumption exists
against the sovereign. Railroad
VS.. Dennis, lie u. 5. 665. The
decision IL r tilroad IS Reil, is not
as claimed an estoppel in this case
/ because it could only b. such dis to
tie matter there in controversy, TO.
| wit, the taxes levied for that year
| 1850 the collection of which il
, enjoined; and besides the ~ ton j:
, not between the same parties. The
decision named has not the force Of
precedent because the scope Of
t that decision did not embrace The
? branch roads all of which excep
: one short line have been built since
!. and that one branch was not in TIT
n county, the tax of which was enjoin
o ed. 1t is also not a precedent ever
S as to the main line upon any ma
: terial point which was not ther
e raised or passed upon by the court
d The act of 1888 must be limited b,
# the Constitution of the State, theI
o in force, which contained provis
: ion forbidding "monopolies and per
o pc,uities." The construction places
d by the State Court upon the Con
y stitution and Laws of ST ate ar
e held binding by the Federal Courts
j. Whether this provision has refer
( ence solely to the prohibition of re
o strictions upon alienation or whethe
d viewed in the light of the history @
e its adoption and judged by the cor
G. text, it is meant, as has been sue
gested to prohibit the grant by tn
It legislature ofperpetual andexclusiv
y privileges, is matter which is nc
o now before us and which cannot b
v brought before US in this collaters
le manner.
If 1t can only be raised by diree
b proceeding by the Attorney Gener'
of if so advised in the nature of gu
to ,1arranto to test the validity OF th
o. charter on that ground. We to
D bear any expression of opinion
Is. the matter is not before us. n
st ERROR.
70 j. w. Hasty, revenue collecto
!; together with George Stegall, Frar
be Pierce and Will Benton, were q
ch rested Saturday at Beaver Dam
NJ