Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1917-02-09
PLAN To APPEAL FROM
CARNETT's DECISION
Attorneys FOR Chartcr-Scckcrs Will
isrin. Test in Supreme
Court.
ENPECT TO ASK MANDAMuS
foim To Large Income state Now
Receives in Franchise TAXES From
Now Resident Corporations CHAR
tered i'm This State.

Following conferences yesterday be-
tween local attorneys VIII" make =
specially OF securing charters from tho
STAT" Corporation Commission, II was
stated that arrangements would be
mad" for a test ease Ia take Ia Ill.
Supreme Court the ruling of Chairman
christopher L. Garnctt II the Corpora
tou Commission II was stated that
tn" stand taken by MIR. ,;arnctt direct
~ reversed tho construction nut or
tn" Virginia law hy his prcdec. Sur.
Judge Fronts. now member at tn"
STATE supreme Court. and by former
hartman ''rumr. nov Judge Of the
Law and Equity Court. 1t is prob
.'hlc 'h't a test charter will he drawn
ANA That on refusal Of the chairman
Of the Corporation Commission IL an
PROV" it. application will bc made to
the supreme Court for "A mandauus
thus bringing III" matter TO a prompt
determine
The issue has been under discussion
ever SIN" Mr.. G;arncttS appointment
TO the commission In an "pininm an
n"un'"d "Wednesday he held contrary
t" puhli" policy tho issuance or !,
charter which viii permit - director
Of the concern applyinn for a charter
!" nave business interests ania.onisii,.
I" those Of tho shareholders for whom
y" - acting in tho capacity or trustee
IN" commission. under the chairman i
ruling. viii also withhold charter
lI"ih any concern which reserves IN
Us articles "f Incorporation the r;eAt
{" withhold from Il s,o.,lhold.r in thc
corporation its accounts and books
REGARD STATES CHARTER
LAWS As MODELS
:>""l. interested attorneys ii was
l"'ht"d out that the Who'll" matter al
IN" issuance IF charters was ..arcfull,
studied 10y tho Constitution ,nuycu,i,u
"I l'o@ and tho Long Parliament" 81
I'"'. ana that NirGinia's iurorlnration
laws ar" regarded as models 81 clear
ness. ana '"t each concern know exact
~ what ~ can aud cannot do
IN recent years an Increasing. ,u,u
hcr Of "ut-of-Staic concerns havc AM
hti"d Tor Virginia charters and INC
in""m" ." tho state from franchise
i""* has boon consid"rahlc MANY ~
,h">" companies never Il" amy actual
business IN this state. hut continue
10 pay an annual franchise tnx II
= claimed that it WAS IN recognition
81 tins that tho General Assembly "f
l"l" passed an act "Ncmp;inc III" in
''hSipl"S "i such nonresident corpor-
"ti"nS from taxation in Virginia.
III" provision aS to aCccss To tho
hooks - desired by some ,,omnanins
I" offset the activities nf spc.nl,torS
wa" buy on" share of stock demand
H"c"s, To tho hooks and then scn ar
max" use q; lists "f St"cilhull.rs for
purposes which may no; he 10 tho
h'S' interests # the company The
other objection ot Mr.. ,iaructt i, was
stated. might H. construed to prevent
a man who has gotten IN u partner
ship and established u coin. business
from taicr turning II over to a corp"r-
alton III which he was one Of the di-
rcrtor".
Several references have been made
on TIC N"or "f recent sessions III tho
General Assembly to the methods at
charters Llrrini. 10
inc QUO Of the arguments nf those who
advocate tn" election Of corporation
commissioners by tn" people that Nir-
Sinia has succeeded New Jersey as tho
nom" Of paper charters OF couccrus
winch IA many eases never matcri;liH.
ahNWh"r" except "n paper. Many Of
those concerns, il is stated. advertise
IN. fact that they are ''chsricrc un,lcr
tho laws az Virginia" and seek stock
subscriptions on tho ground tina, their
"ntcrprisc has been examined into and
has received the formal stamp of APP
prevail Of TIA" authorities of this state