The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1911-01-12
DECISION MEANS ROAD
MUST PAY $500. 900
IN TAX ARREARS
Judges Rule That Amending
and Enlargement of Char
ter Removed Exemptions
Which Corporation En-
joyed-Case May Go to
u. S. Supreme Court

decision which means half a mil.
lion dollarsh or more to the State, cities
and counties OF Virginia, through which
the Richmond. Fredericksburg and Po-
tomae railroad runs, was rendered by
the Supreme Court OF Appeals Thurs
day. when the judges held that the
company is not exempt from taxation.
The county and city taxes assessed
against the railroad amount to $4,000
to which interest for seven years is to
be charged. The franchise tax levied
by the State Corporation Commission
amounts TO $4,000, to which Is to be-
added a penalty OF per cent. for fall
ure to pay when due, and interest on
the principal aid the penalty.
In view Of the large sum involved, IL
Is believed the attorneys for the rail-
road will take the case to the SUI
preme Court of the United States.
Should the railroad lose there II will
have to pay the arrears and about $20,.
600 year in taxes.
The Supreme Courts action Thurs
day was to reverse the decision OF the
City Circuit Court OF Richmond, In
which 1t was held in 1907 that the rails
road was exempt from taxation.
Roads History Reviewed.
The opinion of the court goes into
the history of the Richmond, Freder-
icksburg and Potomac road from its
f1rst charter down to the time the franz
ehtse tax was levied and resistance to
payment made by the railroad.
The record shows that the Richmond.
Fredericksburg and Potomac railroad
is operated on the charter OF a staRe-
coach line which 1t succeeded. The
charter exempte the company from
taxation. The exemption Is made
equally plain in an act OF the General
Assembly OF ls33-'34. As long as the
railroad kept within the bounds Of tha
original charter no effort was made to
collect taxes from it. When 1t began
to enlarge Its system and build branch
lines and amend it's charter SO as to
do these things, the Corporation Conn
mission decided that the Richmond.
Fredericksburg and Potomac was on .
an equal footing with tho other rail-
roads operated in the State and should
be taxed accordingly. The counties
and cities levied a property tax on the
railroad at the same time
The railroads resistance was base
on the original charter which ex-
empted 1t from taxation. and on ar
tfcle l of the Constitution. which says.
No State shall pass any law fupair-
ing the obligation of contract
Counsel fer the railroad >saatutafnax1ss
that the r.. F. d P. had made 4
contract in 1891. when the road was
established. and that the franchise
tax law could not apply.
The States contention was thar bv
reason OF having amended. broadened
and enlarged Its original charter, the
railroad company passed out OF the
exemption class and was taxable like
other railroads
Thirty-four other opinion were
handed down by the court Thursday.
among them being many Richmond
cases
In the wealth OF grist ground by
the judicial machinery was found Z
pathetic human interest case which
excited the sympathies of even thu
Judges on the bench and emphasized
the intricacies OF the law.
The case was that of Dallas Wright
a white man, convicted of participate.
ing in the staying of T. c. and w. J.
Stuart in Buckingham county. Wright.
together with Edward Jones and
Richard Perkins. We're convicted on
the strength OF a dream, a Bucking-
ham resident having declared he saw
vision of the three men killing the
Stuart brothers, and the dream being
allowed to go to the jury. In the
instances OF Jones and Perkins the 4
court reversed the lower court, which
sentenced them to the electric chair.
In Wrfghts case, however. the judg~
ment of the trial court was affirmed
because of technicality, and unless
the governor interferes he must die
The techniality was the failure Of
the trial Judge to have a record made \
on the court books OF the fact that
he would entertain the convicted
mans bill of exceptions during vaca- h
ton. In the opinion the Supreme
Court Judges say: 1--WE, regret chat atisAssS
plaintiffs case has not come beforN
us as the other two defendants thas
we might take similar action In hia
instance" The court said this that u
the plaintiff in the case might uso I
II in the event he is advised to AR
executive action. TN
List OF Opinions.
The other opinions OF the cou1e
were as follows SssSssS
Beury ct ais. vs. Davis Circu1e u
court Of Allegheny county. Keyerse1
Buchanan. Harrison and White. ~
concur In result only.
Mercer VS.. South Atlantic Life Tn-S
surance Company. Law and equity II
court OF city of Richmond. Judgmenf Il
affirmed. 81
Neblett VS.. shackelton. sheriff. q n
ais Circuit court OF Lunenburg cou1x
ty. Decree reversed s
Bonsal VS.. Camp. Circuit court a. IN
city of Norfolk. Decree reversed
woriey W. Adams ct als. Circx1& M
court OF Pittsylvania county. JUl1
ment reversed In part II Sg
Southern Railway Company
Satterfseid's Administsntrtx( CtTc
court Of Pfttsyvania coup4k. yu1
ment reversed. sS II z9 g.
Adams VI Cumhy, cerpofn& =
lContinped - slxtk 1101 N