State v. Galveston, H. & S. A. Ry. Co.
Decision Date | 07 November 1906 |
Parties | STATE v. GALVESTON, H. & S. A. RY. CO. et al. |
Court | Texas Supreme Court |
Action by the state against the Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway Company and others. There was a judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals (93 S. W. 464), reversing a judgment of the district court in favor of the state, and rendering a judgment for each defendant, and the state brings error. Reversed and rendered.
See 93 S. W. 469.
R. V. Davidson, Atty. Gen., and W. E. Hawkins, Asst. Atty. Gen. for the State. Baker, Botts, Parker & Garwood and N. A. Stedman, for defendants in error.
The defendants in error, the Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway Company, the New York, Texas & Mexican Railway Co., the Gulf, Western Texas & Pacific Railway Company, and the Galveston, Houston & Northern Railway Company were all incorporated under the laws of the state of Texas prior to the year 1905, and each of them was engaged in operating its line of railroad, which was situated wholly within the state, during the year 1905. Under an act of the Legislature of the state of Texas, approved May 3, 1905, the Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway Company acquired the property, franchises, and rights of each of the other companies named, and is responsible for all of the obligations of the said other railroad companies.
The Twenty-Ninth Legislature of the state of Texas enacted the following statute, approved on the 17th day of April, 1905, which took effect on the 15th day of July, 1905 (Gen. Laws 1905, p. 336, c. 141):
Each of said railroad companies made report to the Comptroller as required by the second section of said act of "its gross receipts from every source whatever." The reports were accepted and the taxes against each of the said railroads were by the Comptroller assessed upon the gross receipts of each company derived from all sources. Each of the said railroad companies refused to pay the tax assessed as required by law and each of them continued to refuse to pay the same until after the first day of November, 1905. This suit was instituted by the Attorney General of the state of Texas, in the name of the state, in the district court of Travis county, to recover the tax assessed against each of the said railroad companies and 10 per cent. thereon for the failure to pay the same on October 1, 1905, and also to recover of the said railroad companies the penalties declared by the said act for the failure and refusal to pay the said sum after the 1st day of November, 1905; the state claiming a forfeiture of $200 for each day from the said 1st day of November until the filing of the suit on the 24th day of November, 1905, and $200 per day for each day from that time until the time the trial should occur. The defendants each filed general demurrers, presenting the question of the invalidity of the law because of its conflict with different provisions of the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the state of Texas. Special answers were also filed, which presented the same questions in different forms. It was alleged that each of said roads was engaged in the transportation of passengers, freight, and baggage within the state of Texas which was destined to and came from points beyond the limits of the state and to foreign countries, as well as in the carriage of passengers, freight, and baggage between points within the said state of Texas; and that the gross receipts of each of the said companies were made up of the earnings of such road in the carriage of interstate commerce as well as intrastate commerce, which allegation was sustained by the evidence.
In the district court the case was tried without a jury and judgment was entered in favor of the state for 169/365 of 1 per cent. of the gross receipts of each railroad company derived from the carriage of passengers, freight, and baggage within the state of Texas, including that which was destined to points beyond the line of the state, and also that which came from points beyond the line of the state to the defendants' road within the state. The court refused to enter a judgment for the penalties of $200 per day, claimed by the state, upon the ground that the penalties were so excessive and unreasonable that they were void. Each railroad appealed to the Court of Civil Appeals for the Third District, which, upon a hearing, reversed the judgment of the district court and rendered judgment for each railroad company.
It is contended by the railroad companies that the act under examination violates article 14, § 1, of the Constitution of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Texas Co. v. Dyer, Motor Vehicle Com'r
... ... Alleged ... fact that if gasoline tax remittance had been timely mailed, ... week-end bank clearance delay would have prevented state from ... receiving money until Monday, when remittance was actually ... received, and that therefore state was not delayed in use of ... money, ... 464; People v. Omen, ... 124 N.E. 860; Martien v. Porter, 219 P. 817; ... Johnson v. Jarvis, 223 F. 756; Fitzgibbons v ... Galveston Elec. Co., 136 S.W. 1186; Commonwealth v ... Coal & Iron Co., 23 A. 809; Hoff v. Northwestern El ... Co., 139 N.W. 153; St. Louis, etc., R. Co ... ...
-
Jones v. Williams, 6051.
...prescribed by the statute and levied by the authorities for the support of the government; and, as stated in State v. Galveston, H. & S. A. R. Co., 100 Tex. 153, 97 S. W. 71, the penalties are somewhat in the nature of a fine upon a delinquent taxpayer for his delay in paying his taxes. The......
-
State v. Wynne
...oil; and the amount of the tax is measured by a percentage of the market value of the gross products. State v. [Galveston, H. & S. A.] Railway Co. , 97 S.W. 71, 16 Tex.Ct.Rep. 909. Nor does said section violate any provision of the United States Constitution, as the Legislature has the auth......
-
Hurt v. Cooper
...States, so long as the classification does not invade rights secured by the Constitution of the United States." In State v. Galveston, etc., Co., 100 Tex. 153, 97 S.W. 71, 77, a statute levying an occupation tax on railroads, based upon gross receipts from business done in the state, was al......