The Wichita daily eagle., 1898-01-04
IN THE SUPREME COURT
Important Decision in Customs and Land
Grant Matters Rendered

WASHINGTON, Jan. 3-Chief Justice
Fuller of the supreme court today de-
livered the poinion Of the court in the
Frederick S. Passavant ct ell, in reply
TO the following questions certified from
the United States circuit court of ap-
peals for the Sescond circuit court
lin proceedings brought before the
board Of general appraisers 10y protests
under section IA Of the act of June 10,
1890, to review the collectors decisions
upon the entries in this case, had the
board Jurisdiction ito inquire into and
impeach the dutiable valuation 50 re-
ported to the collector by the appraiser
and upon which the collector assessed
the rate of duty Ito which the mercnan-
disc was lawfully subject?
eff the first question is answered
in the affirmative, was the German duty
lawfully included by the appraiser in
his estimate of dutiable value?''
Both questions were answered in the
Affirmative.
The article involved in the contro-
versy was lot Of cotton velvats i'm
ported into the United States from
Germany, where 1t had been in bond.
The German Duty referred in the
second question, is a tax which is i'm
posed by the German government on
merchandise wtlen sold by its manufact-
urers for consumption or sale in the Ger
man markets but when the merchandise
is purchased in bond for expectation to q
foreign country this duty Is remitted by
the German government ana is called a
bonifica5ion tax, as distinguished from
being refunded as rebate.
Justice Peckham handed down the
opinion Of the court in reply to questions
certified TO the court from the United
States circuit court of appeals for the
Eighth circuit, in the case of Edwin II.
McHanry and others VS.. Lore Alfred and
Others. The case involves the right OF
the stSte and county authorities Of
North Dakota TO tax the lands embraced
in the government land grant to the
Northern Pacific railroad and the pres
eut case grew out of the effcyt OF the
officers of Richmond county to levy suct,
a tax under the state law. In this case
the land OF the railroad company was
sold for taxes and the receivers brought
suit 10 set aside the sales on the ground
o. the irregularity and invalidity OF the
sales.
There were six questions certified by
the lower court but the supreme court
held that three Of them did not fal with
in the rules Of the court The other three
l.,
ply % follows:
''Was it the purpose OF chapter 9 aof
the laws OF Dakota for 1883 10 exempt
flom taxation phe land grant OF tf,e
Northern Pacific which are oTssiie %
its right ot way and are not shown 10
De used in ITS business as common car
rier?
EFF sujh was the purpose, was the
act void in whole or IN part as tran
crossing the limitations placed upon the
power OF the territorial legislature? Con-
ceding the lands in controversy TO nave
been subject 10 taxation FOR 1855. were
the appellants by reason o: any of the |
alleged Irregularities o. Gefe-ts in the
mode - assessment entitled 70 equitable |
railef without offering 70 pay the tax |
properly c;isTge25le against said lsnds?" !
The first and ts,ird Of these questions |
were answered - the atfirma tive aud /
the second in the negative.
The court sustained tle lower court IN /
lis refusal 70 grant the Pennsylvania |
Mutual Insurance company an inju1c- |
ton 70 restrain the city OF Austin. Tex, |
f:o,n operating is water works.