The Yale expositor., 1903-01-16

I N was found necessary o. secure an act
/ % Congress authorizing the treasury de-
partmcnt 20 reopen. examine aud allow
\ the claims 81 Michigan and certain other
states, Ihiu authority was occurred by
az amendment Co the urgency deficiency
hil. which WIS approved hy the prusi-
I dent, February II, it1 This amendment
a. passed was changed M as 60 embrace
certain parts ~ MiChignn's claim which
/. we're not covered hy the amendment -
I originally introduced The work OF pre-
l pairing the schedules and proof IN support
\ 81 the interest claim was begun imms-
/ diately after the approval Of the urgency
/ deficiency bill. and in May 1919. the claim
was presented % the treasury department.
I az washington. The sum ~ tJs2,i6 ~
! was allowed and included in the defi-
. cheney appropriation bill passed Just be-
! fore the Adjournment % Congress ia
\ June. 1902 Check for this amount was
received July :. 1902
/ MICHIGAN CENTRAL CHARTER RE
PEAL SUIT.
shortly prior 10 the flrst OF January OF
this year the Michigan Central Railway
I Company instituted suit against the
I state Ia the Circuit Court FOR Wayne
3 county, claiming damages u the extent
\ on $4,000 ON account of The repeal OF
is special charter. which WAS effected
/ hy Act No ~ the Public Acts of 1879.
approved By my predecessor. the lats
The history OF the special charter of tho
/ Michigan Central Railway Company and
: IN" agitation that finally resulted In -
/ repeal by which the company was brought
\ under the general railway laws on tha
/ sam" basis as the other railroad compan-
/ les ot the state. is SO much matter of
} common knowledge that 10 IN not neces-
/ HhrN 10 repeat u In this message. Tho
action % chc legislature 90 l'DO was taken
adFiotdly with "A FULL consideration OF all
that was involved In the repeal. and thu
/ results Will no doubt Justly the wisdom
OF IT, action.
/ one OF the provisions Of the special
charter was that the state reserved the
right 10 alter. amend or repeal the same.
provided the company should be compen-
D 10 IL IN FrH "a a rfN.H 90 afI4
Z tained by reason 81 such alteration.
amendment or repeal. In order 10 make
the repeal cmectiyr u was deemed neces-
sary by the legislature 81 1909. by reason
/ of the above mentioned provision OF the
I special charter. 20 grant permission 20
/ against the state I'm amy of certain circuit
courts OF the state. among which was
/ the Wayne Circuit. 20 cover such damages
as 10 might sustain or b. entitled TO by
reason of such repeal, u any damages
were sustained. and provisions were made
I Tor the payment ~ any judgment that
I might be recovered. The right 10 COM
mcncr action WAS limited 90 "a period ~
ono year after the repeal went into effect.
/ or tho roads whose charters were re-
\ p.aled la 1919. the Michigan Central "a
the only onr that has commenced suit
within the time limited.
In reference To the claim thus made
against the state. while % "a now a mat
I Ter FOR the courts 20 determine yet 1
would say that In my Judgment, NJ
/ legitimate claim Tor damages exists
]
Z been sequcstered, but remains la tina
/ Identical ownership that existed before
repeal. and neither the value 90 TITS
property nor Its earning capacity has
: been so FAR AS I have been able 20 learn
i injuriously affected. In fact the exact
. converse seems 10 have been the. case
/ In view OF the extraordinary demand
that II thus being made. u Is due TO the
people or this state that It's law officers
Use every resource IN their power and
/ within their command % defeat THIS suit
! and ! shall sanction under the exist
lng laws ! am permitted To do. the en-
/ ploymeut OF such special counsel as tbs
+ attorney general NAV recommends and tho
. incurrlng OF such liabilities as may be
! necessary 70 adequately and properly
represent the Interests ~ the state in
this most important litigation
T 81. MARYS FALLS SHIP CANAL
SUIT
Prior 20 1851 by certain congressional
and legislative acts. NEGOTIATIONS were
carried ou Tor the transfer hy tho state
nf Michigan 20 the United STATES ~ tho
St Mary Falis Shiu canal constructed
hy the state ~ Michigan On iNl ur There
1851. the board 90 control ot the canal
WIS directed 90 transfer the canal AMI
its appurt"raurHs tn thr tritci States.
tEo All mat'riAl belonging 10 tn" canal.
ana pIy over o. 10" United states gll
money remaining ln tHr canal iuni. sub
. transfer Of material ana money should Dee
. lu liberation OF tl' construction hy
tho United states 90 e. suitable dry dock
Marvs Falls snip ANA. fnr thr Use OF
disabled vessels Tt. amount iu tho
treasury credited o. the canal fund
af "a" time th" transfer WIS made
under The Acr 81 i,,i Wl. 81 ~ ~ which
had arisen from the accumulation OF canal
tolls in i@C. un demand having been
nude fur th" moneys thus offered % tho
United St1trs. md thor" hsVns been On
the part q tho United states ~ acccp-
. ttnrr ~ the conditions upon which tho
money was o. b" paid over. tuc lrgisla-
q tyre ~ the state hv Joint Resolution No.
. 20 Public Acts of iv- ordered the money
. 90 De- transferred Co the general fund %
the state.
During the last year a demand was
b made upon the board 20 control 81 tho
. canal and the state hy the law officers
4 90 the United StlteE. FOR the money and
. material iu question and Interest. and for
T an accounting ou the part % the state
FOR the same on the theory that by rea-
son 81 the terms % the land grant from
the United states Co aid the state In tho
f construction of the ship caunr the state
. was merely trustee FOR the United
states, and that on the transfer Of tho
cnnal 10 the United States the state was
. bound ~ account FOR any uneNpcndet
hnInnce % the tolls or material remain
ing on hand The demand WIS refused
I for t~o reasons. the attorney general OF
rhe state holding that the claim ~ thu
. United States WIS not justified. and cN>n
though the claim was admitted. no ac-
Z ton could BE- taken except after legis-
latlvc appropriation. Upon the states
. refusal ~ arrcdr Co the demands OF tho
United states tho latter brought suit
against the state IN the United states
supreme court. The attorney general ~
the state has filed a demurrer e. the bill
~ complaint 81 the tnits,i States and
tho crsc Will b. heard in due course Tha
litigation should b. pressed To- mai ad-
Indication with the hone that the state
win be- successful IA IL contention.
THE STATE TREASURY.
The cash balance 81 the state 81 Michi-
gan nj the clos" ~ business Is-cember
stared below was as follows.