The Pickens sentinel. [volume] (Pickens, S.C.) 1871-1903, 1894-03-22
1T is A GREAT VICTORY
THE STATE WINS IN THE RAILROAD
CASES.

Judge Simonton's stropH ID Decision Against
tho Rsi,rs ads-They Mutt, Pey Their
Taxes and the Oost-Gov. T,llman Thinks
1t win End tho Fight.
COLUMBIA, March 15.-The State of
South Carolina and the present admin
istration have gained big and decisive
victory IN the fight with the railroads
for the payment Of taxes as assessed by
the State Board OF Equalization. Judge
Slmonton, In decision rendered at
Charleston on Tuesday, the most i'm
portant portions of which are published
ordered that the South Carolina Road
pay what Is due the State and the costs
of the proceedings. 1t Is conceded that
this decision is practically one against
all the roads which have been resisting
the payment, and the State government
now looks for the railroads to begin to
thought that any appeal will be taken
to the Supreme Court of the United
Statess
1t Is not necessary to review the pro-
tracted fight which has been in pro.
gress between the State and the rail.
roads for over two years. 1t began,
however, by the State Board Of Equali-
Zatlon taking the position that the
railroads were not paying taxes in pro-
portion to the amount paid by the av-
erage citizen. The returns which the
roads had made were increased to what
was adjudged to be about 60 per cent.
of the value of the property. 1t will be
remembered that the roads refused to
pay except on the returns which they
had made aud which they claimed were
fair and equitable. A long fight in the
courts resulted, but the matt or has nev-
or before come up squarely on Its mer-
Its. Heretofore ali the cases have been
on technicalities, and the State has not
been wholly successful In these fights.
These cases were immaterial to the
main issue, onWhich the nistration
was confident of winning.
Judge SimOnton's decision is thor
ough knockout and the roads cannot
fail to see 1t in that light. Governor
Tillman was In good humor when the
reporters saw him yesterday and asked
him about the decision Of Judge Simon
ton. 81 regard the decision" he said,
"as the conclusion Of all the railroad
litigation. The case which has been
decided was test case. and we have
won. l have felt confident all the time
that we would win."
When asked as to whether he thought
there would be an appeal, he said he
did not think 80, at least IN the case Of
the South Carolina Road. Judge Sim
onton, he concluded. Is the boss of that
road and consequently the boss of Re-
ceiver Chamberlain, who Is creature
Of Judge Simonton's court. Whatever
Judge Simonton orders must be done
The other roads, which the decision In
directly affects, inasmuch as the decis
Ion In regard to them will be the same
as, the South CaroliHa Road, may take
an appeal to the Supreme Court.
Governor Tillman, however, thinks
that all the roads will pay what they
owe at once, and avoid any proceedings
which might be taken to forfeit their
charters, the last Legislature having
passed an Act authorizing the forfeit
ure Of the charters of the roads which
resist the payment Of taxes imposed on
them by the State.
The total amount due the State by
the roads Is about 100000. This
amount is the difference between what
the State has all along claimed was due
and the amount which the roads have
admitted was due. The roads. have ev.
cry year paid the amount they admit
ted to be due.
State Treasurer Bates will not have
to borrow money for some time to meet
the claims against the State.
The title of the case decide1 by Judge
Simonton was d. II. Chamberlain, re-
ceiver of the South Carolina Railway
Company3against George II. Walter,
County Treasurer Of Charleston, and
Hugh Ferguson, Sheriff Of the same
county.
The complaint sets forth that tho
road had been returned at S13,0W per
mile and that the State Board rf,ised
this to $4,000 per mile, also raising the
$6, 600 to $4,000 per mile. The bill al
leges that this assessment is unjust, in
asmuch as 1t Is above the assessment
made on the average real and personal
property throughout the State, and
that the State Board ut Equalization
violated the Constitution of the State,
which provides that all property shall
be taxed In proportion to It's value. The
bill further charges that the act of the
board In raising the assessment Is It,
self null and void, and the assessment
1s illegal because this Is not within the
powers Of the board.
Ihe attorneys for the railroad were
BraWley & Barnwell and Mitchell &
Smth, and for the State Attorney Gen
uel Lord. ' '0''
Judge Simonton's decision Is as fol.
lows
1t Is well at the threshold to def,ne
the limit of the power Of this court
over the subject matter Of this suit If
cannot review the assessment made bv
the State officials simply upon the
ground that 1t Is excessive. (Starling
vs.. the Supervisors, 121 u. S., $40. Nor
can 1t make new assessment or direct
another to be made. Estate Railroad
Tax Cases, 81 U. S, Gl5) Nor can it
interfere upon the ground that the tax
Is illegal. civilians vs.. Albany Co.,
122 U. s., 1854; LegoP VS.. Alley, 130 u. S
177) Nor can 1t Interfere because the
court would prefer and would have
adopted different system. Nv. U. Tel.
Co.&s. Massachusetts, 1876 U. s., 553;
Davenport National Bank vs.. Super
yisors, 1913 U. S., 83.) $50 long as a
state, by It's laws prescribing the mode
and subject of t9xation, does not In.
trench upon the legitimate authority
OF the Union or violate any right re-.
cog9lzed or secured by the Constitu-
tlon' of the United States the Federal
Courts, as between the State and the
citizen, can afford the latter no relief
aQAinSt State taxatiOn hO mayor IN iuot