The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1910-09-30
STATE AND CITY
MAY LOCK HORNS
Commission Assesses Regis
tration Fees Against
Free Bridge
OLD COMPANY HELD
TO BE FlGURE-HEAD
Council VIII Be Asked to Pay
Delinquent Charges-Auditor
of Public Accounts Also
Drawn Into Dispute.

Surprised to find that during the
Last seven years no registration fees
had been paid ~ the James River
Bridge Company or even assessed
against II. the State Corporation Com
mission has issued an order fixing
the annual fee at s25 and calling for
the immediate payment OF all back
fees-aggresating s1Ts.
The order will be presented to the
city council, as Richmond has recent
" taken formal control OF the Free
bridge, the property managed by the
James River Bridge Company.
1t Is declared, however. that the
council will not pay the fees, hold
ing that the bridge was the property
or Richmond and Manchester previ-
Gus to consolidation. and that since
consolidation the bridge has been
owned by Greater Richmond.
The fact that the property was un-
der the care of commission viii not
he allowed to enforce payment. If the
attorneys for the city can preyent
II, and it will be shown that IL a
registration fee is collectible against
the Free Bridge, the fire and police
commissions may also be required to
pay for their right to exist
IL is held by the commission. on
the other hand, that the bridge was
In the custody of corporation: that
though II was built by the two ctttes.
acting Jointly, the company was char
tered and capitalized at 100000. and
mat because the cities chose to allow
the company To remain extant, q reg
istration Zee Is due for every year of
IT'S existence, while the fact that the
nrDnArfyt VI 4 ,nf-
mission does not in any way relieve
the city OF payment
Commission DISCHARGED.
The commissioners, recently rstt~v.
eo from duty. We're elected hy the City
council and held Office for life. Thev
exercised complete control OF the
bridge. and we're allowed their own
discretion In the makiag Of contraets
WIKI pubiic service companies daxtxs-
ing to use IT for traffic purposes.
FROM the standpoint OF the corn
mission the company in viewed a. IL
the city mad nothing to do with IT. II
Is viewed as standing aione and OPP
eraing under its charter, and on this
charter, according to the statutes
governing taxation. certain regtstra-
uon lees are undoubtedly due.
richmond, however, looks upon the
rec hFidse as one or It's municipal
assets 1t LIS owned as the City Han
~ owned. az the pumpnouse is owned.
as Monroe Park Is owned, and az GER
tain commissioners or Officers have
charge OF the pumphouse, SO certain
commissioners, though vested with
larger authority. have had charge of.
the Free Bridge. and as no rees are
coilectable on the pumphouss, II ia
neid that the James River Bridge
company was a corporation in name
only. that it is merely the shadow
OF corporation. being in fact prac-
ideally null as far as a corporation
Is concerned, and that In necessary
consequence no registration fee should
De charged against IT,
The matter will be put In the hands
or the Auditor or Public Accounts.
and he will cal upon the Attorney
General. IL 1t he decided to make a
contest. In such event II Is held ov
those interested in the matter that
the case will have TO 60 TO the SUI
preme Court for final settlement. m
neither side will be willing TO resr
until the highest tribunal mas passed
upon 1t.