The pioneer express. [volume] (Pembina, Dakota [N.D.]) 1883-1928, 1909-11-12
SUPREME COURT ASKED 70 PASS
UPON VALIDITY on TERRI.
ToRlAL CHARTER.
BELIEVE STATE Will WIN
State Right to Levy 4 Per Cent Up
held ey Attorneys osnsr.
al Simpson and
49, Peterson, .,.yT:"

VI Su0 OMIeU 0I6tSS supreme COurC.
Arguments were concluded in the
gross earnings tax case, and Attor-
ney General Simpson, Assistant At
torney General Peterson and w. r.
Begg, attorney for the Great Northern
road, have returned to st. Paul.
The impression prevails here that
the state Of Minnesota stands much
more than an even chance to win the
present suit. This belief was borne
out by the questions asked by men,
bers Of the court during the final
arguments. The questions were d.
rected mainly toward determining the
construction which had been given
in the past by the Minnesota courts
to the territorial charter Of the Great
Northern, but indicated an attitude Of
mind on the part Of the court which
tended to support the states side Of
the case. The Great Northern had
refused to pay more than a per cent
tax on any Of its earnings within
the state of Minnesota.
The roads principal contention,
however, is as to the so-colled main
line" from st. Paul to Breckenridge
and the so-called branch line" from
East Minneapolis to Sank Center. If
the Great Northern secures decision
which. affirms its right to a per cent
tax on these two original lines, au-
thorized by the territorial charter, it
will consider its case won. The state.
on the other hand, expects to secure
authority to levy the 4 per cent tax
on the earnings of all the lines oper-
ated by the Great Northern.
The states case was presented in a
forcible manner by Attorney General
Simpson and Assistant Attorney Gen.
eral Peterson. Mr.. Begg, for the
Great Northern, set up the plea that
up to the time Of the recent decision
IN this gross earnings case, by the
Minnesota supreme court, that body
had always held the territorial chart
er of the Great Northern to be valid.
For this reason, he said, property
right had been created. The Great
Northern, he asserted, when 1T made
the lease of the st. Paul, Minneapolis
aNd Manitoba, had right to believe
that 1t had secured the privilege of
immunity from other taxation than
specified in this territorial charter,
namely, per cent.
Attorney General Simpson declared
that no such property right existed.
He cited opinions to prove that the
real question now at issue, the right
Of the state to levy taxes, had never
been before the court as to the Great
Northern's territorial charters. The
general rule of practice, he pointed
out, is that states right to levy
taxes cannot be contracted away, and
In the present case he asserted the
courts had never established proper
rights by holding the old territorial
charter to be binding upon the pres.
ent state, as to its tax provisions.
The state also made the point that
the territorial charter, issued in 1857
to the Minnesota and Pacific, under
which the Great Northern claims i'm.
munity from more than per cent
tax, had been superseded by the new
charter of 1865, issued by the present
state of Minnesota, and which does
not give a specific 8 per cent tax to
the assignees Of the old Minnesota
and Pacific.