The Prince George's enquirer and southern Maryland advertiser. (Upper Marlborough, Md.) 1882-1925, 1902-05-09
MARYLAND
MUST PAY ANNUITY.

A special dispatch to the Baltimore SIM
| from Washington Monday night says:
THE Supreme Court of the United
States today dismissed the case of the
Northern Central Railway Company,
| plaintiff in error, against Joshua w.
Herring, Com ptroler of the State of Mary
land; Murray Vandivcr, Treasurer, and
| Governor Smith, upon motion of Attorney
General Isidor Rayner and Mr.. a. 5.
Worthin gton. attorney for the State, on
the ground of lack Of jurisdiction.
sIn 1854 the General Assembly of
MARYLAND created an annuity of 100000
PAYABLE by the Northern Cent raj Railway
to the State. The annuity was made re-
deemable by the act for 81, 500,0 900 within
10 years and the annual payments were
secured by a mortgage to be executed by
the company in favor of the State. This
act was accepted by the company, and in
accordance with its terms and the cove
way company paid the annuity fron 1854
until 1900 without protest or objection.
The time for redeemng the same under
the terms of the act expired in 1864 with
out the railway awaiting itself of the
privilege.
I'm 1900 the Northern Central Railway
Company asked the court to compel the
State to capitalize the annuity at $780,
900 and take that amount in cxtinguish-
ment of the same. In its bill the plaintiff
in error claimed that it had the right to
extin guish the annuity upon the payment
of the sum of 81 SOC, 600 and having ten
dered that amount to the State applied
for a mandatory injunction to compel the
State to take it. The defendants in error
demurred to the bill and the Court of APP
peals decided the case in favor of the
State.
attorney General Rayner argued that
the Court of Appeals of Maryland was
simply called upon to decide whether the
instrument was mortgage to secure all
| annuity or mortgage to secure debt,
| and the court held that it was a n ortgage
for an annuity, and that the road must
continue to pay the annuity as it had
done for nearly half century. MIR. Ray
ner's contention was that the annuity
was the creation of an annuity in extin-
guishment of the old debt which the State
had against the Baltimore and Susque-
hanna Railroad, the predecessor of the
Northern Central Railway
The railway company thereupon took
an appeal to the United States Supreme
Court, and the decision of this tribunal is
complete victory for AttorneyGeneral
Rayner, who is sustained in his contention
that the issues involved do not come
within the jurisdiction of that tribunal.
The opinion of the Maryland Court of
Appeals, therefore, stands as the finding
of the court of last resort.
Mr.. Rayner has conducted the case
from the beginning through every inter-
mediate stage to successful finish. He
argued it before Judge Wickes, Messrs.
Bernard Carter and John l. Donaldson
representing the railroad company. Be-
fore the Supreme Court he had as his
opponent such a redoubtable advocate
and distin guishcd pleader as Mr.. Wayne
MacVeagh.
The briefs filed in the case, especially
those filed in the Court of Appeals of
Maryland, were very voluminous, involv-
ing examination by counsel on both sides
of all of the English cases and railroad
mortgages. 1t required a great amount
of labor and research.
The outcome of the suit in favor of the
State will have the effect of putting into
the public treasury nearly 100000 on
account of the annuity, no payment hav-
ing been made while the suit was pend
ing. The annuity, besides being absolute
ly secured, is at the rate Of per cent. or
higher rate than money commands at
the present time, SO that sale to the
savings banks of Baltimore, which was
contemplated at the time the suit was
brought, would bring big premium.
The mortgage, Mr.. Rayner said last
night, was the first annuity mortgage ever
given in the United States. Since then
annuity mortgages in England and
America have become quite common.