New Ulm review., 1895-10-16
THE COURT OF LAST RESORT,
The q. S. Supreme Court Will Pass Upon
an Important Tax Case.
The Attorney General Goes to Washington
to Argue 1t.
1t is Against the Winona & St. Peter
Land Go.
Involves the Collection Of Taxes in Brown
and Redwood Counties.
rHE COURT OF LAST RESORT,

Hon. Fl. ". Childs, attorney general of
theState of Minnesota, has gone toWash-
ington, to represent the state in the suit
Of the state against the WinOna Il st.
Peter Land con- any, which On an appeal
l'y the company from the highest court
IN Minnesota, has been taken to the court
of last resort. It has been placed on the
October calendar of the supreme court
of the United States, and has been called
tor a hearing to-day.
This. case does not only involve large
amount of money, but, upon the deci-
sion of the United States supreme court.
rests the constiutionality of the state law
governing the taxation of certain real
property holdings in the state, a law
which the supreme court of Minnesota
has declared valid. The title of the case
as it now appears on the calendar of the
supreme court is: The Winona & St. Pc
ter Land Company, plaintiff in error, vs..
The State of Minnesota, defendant in er-
ror. The case will undoubtedly attract
considerable attention. not only on ac-
count of the Interesting points of law
that have been called into question, but
because of the prominence of respective
the counsel, Congressman J. a. Tawney
of Winona representing the plaintiff land
company, his connection with the case
dating back to the first action, nearly
nine years ago.
Originally the action, now before the
supreme court of the United States, was
brought in 1886 by the county auditors
of Brown and Redwood counties. as
separate cases, against the Winona & St.
Peter Land company, to compel it to
pay taxes on it's lands in those counties.
In previous years these lands, which were
part of the territorial grant to the
Transit Railroad company, afterwards
approved to the Winona & St. Peter
Railroad company, and by it in 1887 to
the plaintiff in the present action, had
been untaxed, being treated by the Off
GERS of the counties in which they were
situated as the lands of the railroad COM
pany and exempt from taxation. In 1886
they were assessed for the taxes for each
year subsequent to the date when they
were conveyed from the state to the rail-
road company, going back, in some in
stances, eighteen years. Payment of these
taxes, interest and penalty, was refused.
Proceedings were thereupon instituted in
the district courts Of the two counties to
enforce their collection. Upon the trial
of the case judgment was ordered for,
the amount of the taxes assessed, with
interest at 7 per cent and penalty and an
additional penalty of Is per cent. The
case was appealed to the supreme court,
where the Judgment of the lower court
was affirmed, save as to the interest and
penalties and the taxes accruing for.
more tran six years previous to the
commencement of the action. The ag-
ereeate amount of taxes for. which judg-
ment was ordered against the lands.
was $41,51s.26. From this judgment
the plaintiff in error, by writ of error,
appealed to the supreme court of the
United States.
The Attorney General took with him a
brief prepared by Mr.. Lind on behalf of
Brown County.
A daughter was born to Mr.. and Mrs.
VIM. Bishof last Saturday.