Secor v. Singleton

• Decision Date: 06 December 1881
• Citation: 9 F. 809
• Parties: SECOR and others v. SINGLETON and others.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri

9 F. 809

SECOR and others v. SINGLETON and others.

United States Circuit Court, E.D. Missouri.

December 6, 1881

Baker &amp Hughes, for plaintiffs.

Waldo P. Johnson and H. A. Cunningham, for defendants.

The bill alleged that the Alexandria & Bloomfield Railroad Company was duly incorporated by an act of the general assembly of the state of Missouri, and that by a provision of its charter its stock was made exempt from taxation for the period of 20 years after its completion, which period has not yet expired; that said road ran through the counties of Clark, Scotland, and Schuyler, in the state of Missouri, to a point on the northern boundary line of said state;;hat said company was afterwards consolidated, under the laws of Missouri;, and Iowa, with the Iowa Southern Railway Company a corporation in the state of Iowa, and has been since known as the Missouri, Iowa & Nebraska Railway Company; that by virtue of the laws of said states the consolidated company became entitled to all the privileges and immunities of the original corporations; that said Iowa & Nebraska Railway Company has no property in said counties of Clark, Scotland and Schuyler, except its roadbed and property used in the operation of its road; that taxes had been illegally assessed against said property, and that the defendants, the auditor of the state of Missouri, the judges of the county courts of said counties, and others, have combined to compel said company to pay taxes in said counties upon its property therein situated, and had employed attorneys to institute and maintain suits for taxes assessed against said property that the complainants owned a large amount of stock in said company, and had requested the directors and officers of said company, and said company, to refuse to pay said taxes, and to take proper steps to resist the imposition of taxes upon said property, but that they had refused to take any such steps; and that said company had, through its officers announced its intention to pay said illegal taxes. The prayer of the bill was that the taxation of said company's property should be declared illegal, and the acts of the auditor and county officers void and of no effect; and for a writ of injunction to restrain the defendants from taking any steps towards the assessment of taxes upon the property of said road or the collection thereof. The defendants demurred to the bill upon the ground that it set forth no ground of...