Lane v. Rowan County Com'rs

• Citation: 52 S.E. 140,139 N.C. 443
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina
• Decision Date: 07 November 1905
• Parties: LANE. v. ROWAN COUNTY COM'RS.

52 S.E. 140

139 N.C. 443

LANE.

v.ROWAN COUNTY COM'RS.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Nov. 7, 1905.

Licenses — Occupation Tax — Emigration Agents.

An officer of a foreign corporation, who comes into the state to procure laborers to work under himself in another state on work which he superintends and manages for the corporation, and who receives no consideration or compensation for carrying the laborers out of the state, and the laborers procured by whom are not employed in any other business or under the management of any other person than himself, is not engaged in the business of an emigrant agent, within the statute exacting a license tax from persons engaged in such business.

Appeal from Superior Court, Rowan County; Peebles, Judge.

Action by C. W. Lane against the commissioners of Rowan county. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

Civil action begun in justice's court, and upon appeal heard in the superior court on an agreed statement of facts. The plaintiff is, and was at the times hereinafter mentioned, a resident of the state of Virginia. He is, and was at said times, one of the four stockholders, and a director, and the secretary of Lane Bros. Company, a corporation doing railroad construction work in the states of Virginia and West Virginia. The work of the company at——, W. Va., is, and was at said times, under the immediate control and management of the plaintiff. He alone hired employes to labor for the company at ——, W. Va., and he alone had authority to discharge them. The three other members of the company severally had entire charge of the construction work in three different places in said states. On July 18, 1905, the plaintiff was in Rowan county, N. C., and then and there procured laborers for employment for Lane Bros. Company to work under himself at ——, W. Va., on certain railroad construction which he superintended and managed for the company. None of the laborers were used or employed in any other business, or under the management of any person other than the plaintiff. The plaintiff came to Rowan county for this purpose. They were not carried to West Virginia for any other purpose. The plaintiff received no consideration or compensation for carrying the laborers out of the state from any person or corporation. He received, as such manager and secretary, a regular salary from Lane Bros. Company, and the company paid the transportation of the laborers to West Virginia. He has not solicited laborers to leave this state to be employed in any business, and under no management, except as above. At the time he paid the emigration license tax, as hereinafter set forth, it was not his purpose to carry laborers from North Carolina, except to be used as above and under his personal direction. The plaintiff is not an emigrant agent, unless the above facts con stitute him such. Before taking the laborers away, the sheriff of Rowan county required him to pay an emigration license tax of $200. The tax was paid under written protest, and to avoid being detained and interrupted in his business; the plaintiff contending that the collection thereof was illegal, invalid, and...