The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1893-05-03

The Road Resisted the Payment of the
State Tax in 1ss1-s2 and the State Won
in the United States Supreme Court
The Question of Interest Was Left
Unsettled but Was Compromised by
the Law Makers.
AUGUSTA, May 2.-The Grand Trunk
railroad paid into the state treasury to-
day $1S2, ,797 being the amount of back
taxes due the state and interest figured
in accordance with the agreement sane
toned at the last session of the legisla-
ture. This payment is the end of the
we'll known "Grand Trunk tax case"
which the State of Maine has had on it's
hands for ten years. The statutes of
Maine provides for the levying of tax
upon the exercise of the privileges of a
corporation within the State of Maine.
In 1881 and 1882 the Grand Trunk rail
way refused to pay its taxes to the state,
claiming that this law of Maine was a
violation of the constitution of the
United States, as regards general COM
L
of the state directs the state treasurer to
collect the taxes with interest at the
rate of ten per cent year. The whole
amount of the taxes which the Grand
Trunk refused to pay in the two years in
question was about $4,000, and 10 per
cent interest on that sum from 1882 to
the present time would bring the total
figure to more than $50, 900. But the whole
amount involved with the interest was
something like 5000, 200 as the road paid
no taxes during the time the suit to re-
cover the taxes for the years named was
pending.
The case was begun in the state courts
about ten years ago. When Hon. Henry
B. Cleaves was attorney general it was
removed to the United States circuit
court, where Judge Webb decided adj
versely to the constitutionality of the
act and therefore in favor of the road.
Then Attorney General Baker took the
case to the United States supreme court,
and there Attorney General Littlefield
argued it in 1891. The supreme court
reversed the decision of the circuit court
and sent down decision that the rail
road should pay the taxes demanded.
But this didn't say anything about the
interest at 10 per cent
Inc QuoSC1On Jl6n came up Wn0Jn6r
the decision included interest, and was
heard by Judge Webb in July of last
year. Hon. A. A. Strout appeared for
the road, and Attorney General Little
field for the state. Briefs were submit
ted by the counsel, so the judge gave de-
cision without argument. His decision
was that the direction of the supreme
court did not require the payment of the
10 per cent interest.
Attorney General Littlefeld took ex-
ceptions in order to carry the case back
to the supreme court and obtain a more
definite response on the question of in
terest.
The matter of the interest was still
pending when the legislature met last
winter and the Grand Trunk appealed to
the general court. By it's counsel, Hon.
A. A. Strout and Hon. Charles F. Libby,
it proposed a reference of the matter of
interest to commission to be composed
of three justices of the state supreme
court. Attorney General Powers opposed
this and finally the legislature agreed to
another proposition, which was that the
interest should be reckoned at per cent
instead Of 10 per cent, the taxes, interest
and taxable costs to be paid into the
state treasury before July l, 1892. The
road has accordingly made the payment,
which amounts to $182,79 as above
stated.