New-York tribune., 1910-02-22
'HREE STATES WIN
'1XfTTON L1HS Or
TWO UPSET.
n;fed States Supreme Court
Hands Doscn More than
Fifty Decisions

FTfG DCCtStOHs-
= sshineton. Feb. 2I.-In more than my
{-isior1s to-day the supreme Court OF tile
|rite5 States paSsed on the administration
i,,stice as il appeared in the lower fed-
"a and state courts liz more Than nan
= states in the Union. Some state laws
ere declared unconstitutional and some
c-e upheld.
TIE most important cases involved state
i~oss laws. Minnesota won complete
,-,--v over the Great Northern and Chi
| - Great Western Railway companies
-, had resisted the states attempt 10
.,x or : ner cent on their gross earn
S7uth Carolina also Upn victory over
|, = railroads il. that state when the court
Isoofed the view Of the supreme Court OF
I,,-t7, Carolina that the law requiring rail-
bsss 10 nav a penalty Of $50 for failure TO
/ rs; claims fer losses within ninety DAYS
,riied enly 10 in;rastate traffic
| \ snSas won its fight with the Missouri
Il ifc Railway Company for the inslaiia-
r q separate passenger trains on
fsnch road from Madison, Kan. TO the
fsrsss- Missouri state line. In inns case
. court announced a doctrine thaI VIII
- -h every state 1t declared tnat even IL
! IS nasSenge- train vas operated at a JOSS
r. railroad was under duty TO perform
I'D service as long as il retained its
as- s-ter.
ALBANIA had it, statute levying an an
ua- franchise tax on foreign corpora
o7s declared unconstitutional Raliroacs
Iroc-lst the case 70 the supreme court
c0o-ria soet in most Of its contentious IN
ne attempt II levy property and 2failcii'Se
xas on the Georgia Railroad and Banking
company. despite charter exemptions
MINNESOTA TAX UPHELD
--+e opesficr OF the validity as applied 10
>, t,resf Northern Railway Company, 81
ee Minnesota laws providing that all rall-
fosde in that state should pay lax OF
e- -er- on their gross earnings was hrsl
sfze5 in the District Court o. Ramsey
fotntv Mimi. in 1906. when sii1 was
rourht 70 RECOVER Sl2e.o"o, the difference
tween ~. Ter cent claimed bH the state
n5 tax Of . per cent on the gross earn
rs a. tho railroad claimed IL was Only
shfe 20 nay The District Court OF Ram
County held that the Great Northern
ho17ld pav the additional per cent tax on
gross earning o1 sixteen hranch tHl,s'
~ zyas not required 10 pay the aonidol-ai
a. on the gross earnings OF the hrdhci
ne E.,77lr or ou-ued bv the ST Paul. Mime
oris d Manitoba Railroad COMPANY from
---a, the Great Northern company mad
-eee5 its lines The ground for excepting
he latter lines was q provision Of the char
r ~ ,bo Minnesota & Pacific Railroad,
-srted in 1s5- and which limited lis taxa
io- - > per cent OF its gross earnings
BON sides appealed - the supreme tour'
Minnesota. The state held that the
,e- cent gross earnings tax provided fol
-- Minnesota & Pacific Railroad COMPANY
s7 l,ee7 stI1,ersoded and at any rate thai
uss personal 10 that company and could
a- nc transferred. after the adoption of
&c state constitution. 10 any OF its suc-
eezors. The Supreme Court held that the
-reaze in taxation 10 4 per cent was valid
J 10 tho Great Northern The chicago
--eat Western Railway Company held that
= was entitled TO similar exemption under
: territorial charter
The Kansas case first came to the atten-
lion OF the state courts when the Railroad
< Commission asked that the railroad be
-orlpelIed to obey its order requiring il 10
trarate a separate passenger train ser
- instead Of mixed passenger and
eight service on the Madison branch Of
tv road The company answered that jhe
erllleS from tho branch did not warrant
senarsfe service and II the deficit in such
service was to he me- by business else
err the property Of the road would bo
7Fscsted. in violation of the Constitution
ALABAMA LAW MILL AND VOID
Tie constitutionality of the act of the
= hama Legislature Of March :. 1?01. Was
sd hv the Southern Railway Company
ter IL mad been required In pay go. 40 As
80 annual franchise tan. This act pro
ded that al she foreign corporations au
r .o-ized 70 do business in the state unde1
TIC laws Of Alabama must pay an annua
r-suchise tax The railroad company helc
II this was Unconstitutional. being al
improper discrimination between domestic
nd foreign corporations The city Cour
ot Birmingham, i'm which the suit va
h-ouEht by The road to recover the lax
r4vs judgment against the railroad. an'
s Supreme court of Alabama in affirm
2 that decision. held the law constitu
riaua'. The same decision was given II
he suits of the Louisville < Nashville
Fzilrosd Company and other railroads fo'
.e recovery Of the taxes paid under th'
Nv.
Inc opinion in the Georgia case was th'
FIST Justice LuTtoD has rendered in IN
IS 3prene Courf- The only qualification o
his victory was = modification Of the de
cree as 70 the Washington branch As 4
rhat branch. the state won it's contention.
The Arkansas law imposing an incor
Dora1ion fee on foreign organizations &c
-ardinE 20 their capita stock MS dc
clared unconstitutional. The decision was
a7uourced by Justice Harlan The poin
-me up in the suit of the Western TnioI
TrIeEraph Company 10 en:oin the Secre
farv cf state OF Arkansas from oustins
Ic company for failure 10 pay the fee
y 1e zction of tho lower federal court il
permanently enjoirins tho Secretary ot
state Was affirmed.
At fha same iime an opinion by Justice
DRY reversed the lower federal Cour
which dismissed the suit Of the West-rr
mon "a erloin tiIe prosecuting attorney:
IN Arkansas from collecting penalties un
=