The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1905-11-09

LINE OF ARGUMENT
Attorney General GiImer Will Contend
Before the Supreme Court That
the Decision OF the State Court
Does Mt Ctntravene the
State Constitution.
(Snecial TO News and Observer

Especial to News and Observer
Washington, d. c., Nov. 7.-Attor-
General Gilmer, of North Carroll
ma, is here today to present argument
for the State, in the case of the Armour
Packing Company, versus B. r. Lacy,
State Treasurer of North Carolina,
which has come up before the United
States Supreme Court under writ of
error to the Supreme Court of the
State on final judgmen upholding the
constitutionality of the tax act of
1903. Under that law every meat
packing house doing business in the
State is taxed $100 for each county
In which the business is carried
on. This case went to the State
Supreme Court from the Superior
Court of Buncombe county, and the
facts are as follows: The Armour
Packing Company, Incorporated under
the laws of the State of New jersey,
is engaged in packing meats princi-
pally in Kansas City, Missouri. The
corporation also has places of bust
ness. including warehouses and cold
storage plants, in Wilmington, Green's
boro, Asheville, Charlotte, and Fay
etteville. North Carol ma. At each of
these places the company has one
or more employees, that is, book
Keepers, stenographers. shipping
clerks, statesmen. drivers, laborers who
box their meats wrap and crate goods
for delivery as they are sold. The
company has nowhere in North Car
olina, any meat packing houses for
Strengthening, dressing, curing or man
ufacturing the products of animals
for food or commercial use, but takes
ORDERS which are forwarded to Kan
sas City, and the packing house prod
ucts are shipped in pulk to the va
rious places in North Carolina above
mentioned Certain meats and 9TH
er packing-house products are also
shipped from Kansas CITY to the
North Carolina points, without pre-
vious sale or contract of sale. These
products are stored in the warehouses
or cold storage plants of the COM
pany, and are kept for sale in due
course of trade as domestic business
and remain in storage until disposed
of on orders received. after they have
been stored. There are also in the
cities named above, commission mer-
chants. brokers and butchers who sell,
by wholesale and retail, packing
house products in competition with
Armour & Co.. but who are not en-
gagged in meat packing house bust
ness in North Carolina or elsewhere.
In North Carolina, at all points where
the Armour Packing Company is en-
gagged in business, and at various 9TH
err places in he State, there are en-
gagged in business as the Armour Pack
ing Company is engaged, packing
houses which pack articles of food
other than meat, and offer them for
sale in the State. such as peas, beans,
tomatoes, corn, pumpkins, fruits. fish,
oysters. etc. The products of said
packing houses are articles of food
and commerce and are sold through
agents. brokers, wholesale and retail
merchants, just as the products pack
ed by the Armour Packing Company
are sold.
The counsel for the Armour Com
pany raised a Federal question in this
suit by alleging that the Act of 1903
is in violation of the Fourteenth
Amendment to the Constitution of
the United States.
The States Contention.
Acknowledgement Gilmer, in pre-
senting his argument unfolding the
right of the State, says that the Su-
preme Court of North Carolina having
declared that the statute applies sole
ly to the business of the Amour Pack
ing Company within the State of
North Carolina and that it does not
apply TO OF dHecI us DuSileSS Wnlcn
is interstate to its character, the
statute does not violate the commerce
clause of the Constitution.
He cites the case of Kehrer versus
Stewart passed upon by the United
states Supreme Court in February last.
which came to that count on writ
OF error to the Supreme Court of
Georgia, involving the constitutionality
or statute imposing tax upon pack
ing house agents. and the liability
OF an agen, of Nelson, Morris & Co,
meat-packing firm of Chicago. to
pay the same. The facts contained in
the petition in Kehrer v. Stewart are