Alma record. (Alma, Mich.) 1878-1928, 1907-12-25
STATE IS A LOSER
Fought the Grand Trunk and
Got the Worst OF II
OPINION OF JUDGE WEST
Insham County Jurist Says the Char
Ter Of Old Pontiac Ry Co. is
Good Now

The case of the State of Michigan
against the Detroit, Grand Haven d
Milwaukee railroad TO collect taxes
from the corporation amounting to
S3O5, 1873. 81 was decided against the
state Monday morning by Judge West
OF lngham Circuit Court. The argu-
ments in the case, made June IL, were
on the question whether the demurrer
of the corporation TO the declaration
OF Attorney General Bird in the suit
brought TO set aside the special char
ter under which the company is op-
Grating its road should be sustained.
The state in its argument went back
70 the time that the Pontiac Railroad
Co., which afterwards became a part
of the D. q. H. q NJ. was chartered
by a special act In 1884 1t was alleged
that the Pontiac Railroad Co. did not
finish its line until ls4l while accord
ing 10 its charter the road should he
operated within two years or the rights
and privileges of the corporation
should he held null and void The act
contained no provision of any charac-
ter with regard to the tsxtaion of the
company
Another part of the ID. q. II. a. NJ.
line. known as the Oakland g. Ottawa
Railroad Company, was chartered in
lS4l. In 1885 the two companies were
consolidated under the name of the
Detroit Grand Haven e. Milwaukee
Railroad Company. Later the rail-
road company was purchased by the
Grand Trunk.
When the legislature several years
ago passed the bill repeating all special
charters on railroads in Michigan, the
ID. G. II. & NJ. contested claiming
that its charter was perpetual and
could not he repealed. In the tax suits
decided by the United States supreme
court last year, the contention of the
company was sustained and it was per-
mitted to continue the payment of
taxes on the basis of its capital stock
Attorney General Bird in bringing
the suit, alleged that the special char
ter which was granted when the road
was built only from Detroit TO Pontiac,
could not be extended TO cover the en-
tire system from Detroit to Grand
Haven and contended that the special
charter rights should be set aside ana
the road placed on the same basis as
other lines in Michigan.
The state claimed that the d. y. II.
& NJ. was during the years 1903, 1904
and 1905 subject TO taxation the same
as other railroads, and that the
amount for the respective years was
50. IA. a5, SlO1, 573 66 and SlO4 AZ. GO
With few exceptions the railroad
claimed that the company has paid
since 1856 tax of one percent on it's
capital stock. The tax amounts to
S25, l21 40 and the company claimed
that that amount only was due the
state.
In his opinion Judge West referred
TO the decision of the United States SUI
perme court. in which the auditor gen.
eral was prepetually restrained from
collecting taxes from the d. q. II &
M. Judge Neist says that extended
opinion is unnecessary because the
United States and Michigan supreme
courts have decided the issues raised
in the case. Judge West says: II
must hold under these authorities that
the charter of the Detroit q Pontiac
Railroad Company still exists and that
the defendant company by virtue of
hat.charter and subsequent acts of leg
islation has a contract with the state,
regulating the matter of its taxation,
and the taxes as claimed by the state,
not being in accord with such contract,
cannot be enforced. - Judge Weist dis
missed the bill.