State v. Winona & St. Peter Railroad Co.
Decision Date | 01 January 1875 |
Citation | 21 Minn. 472 |
Parties | STATE OF MINNESOTA <I>vs.</I> WINONA & ST. PETER RAILROAD COMPANY. |
Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Proceeding in the district court for Waseca county, under ch. 1, Laws 1874, to enforce the collection of delinquent taxes against certain lands in that county, being a part of defendant's land grant. Defendant answered, claiming that the lands were its property, and that, by its charter, they were exempt from taxation. See State v. Winona & St. Peter R. Co., ante, p. 315.
At the trial before Lord, J., it was agreed that defendant still held the legal title to the lands, and the only question made was whether a certain contract, the material parts of which are set out in the following opinion, was, in effect, a conveyance of the lands, so as to render them subject to taxation. The court ruled that the lands were properly taxed, and certified the case to this court, under § 120 of the act before cited.
Geo. P. Wilson, Attorney General, for the State.
Wilson & Taylor, for defendant.
Certain lands, the legal title to which stands in this company, were placed on the tax lists for the year 1873, and taxes levied and assessed thereon. In the proceedings to enforce payment of taxes on real estate remaining delinquent on the first day of June, 1874, for the county of Waseca, the company filed answers as to taxes on these lands, claiming that they are exempt from taxation under § 4, ch. 2, of the act of the legislative assembly of the Territory of Minnesota, entitled, "An act to execute the trust created by an act of Congress, entitled, `An act making a grant of land to the Territory of Minnesota, in alternate sections, to aid in the construction of certain railroads in said territory, and granting public lands in alternate sections, to the State of Alabama, to aid in the construction of a certain railroad in said state,' and granting certain lands to railroad companies therein named," approved May 22, 1857. The lands in question came to this company under this act, and other acts amendatory and supplemental thereto.
The company executed a contract October 31, 1867, with one Danford N. Barney and others. The material parts of this contract are as follows:
There was a stipulation by Barney and his associates to pay all the debts of the company up to November 1, 1867; but as the covenant to convey was not made to depend on that, it is not necessary to quote it.
The lands involved in these proceedings are a part of those described in the contract. After the making of this contract, the lands were conveyed by the state to the company, and they have never been conveyed by the company, nor disposed of, except by this contract, and except that in pursuance of it, they are held for sale, and contracted to be sold, and parcels of them sold by the company, from time to time, as purchasers can be procured. The contract is still in force and unchanged.
As appears from the contract, the entire consideration for the sale of the lands was received by the company before the contract was made. It is therefore a sale of the lands, with a covenant to convey. As it was not executed with the requisite formalities required for conveyances of real estate, the legal title remained in the company; but as the entire consideration had been paid, the equitable title passed to the purchasers, and the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
County of Traverse v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co.
...and hence the lands are subject to taxation. For authorities that the transaction is a sale, see Com. v. Nashville, supra; State v. Winona & St. P.R. Co., 21 Minn. 472; St. Paul & C.R. Co. v. McDonald, 34 Minn. County of Brown v. Winona & St. P.L. Co., 38 Minn. 397; Huck v. Chicago, 86 Ill.......
-
Winona St Land Co v. State of Minnesota
...to convey the legal title, postpone indefinitely the exemption. This question was first presented to that court in State v. Winona & St. P. R. Co., 21 Minn. 472, and the decision in the present case was simply an affirmance of the prior ruling. See, also, County of Brown v. Winona & St. P. ......
-
Noyes v. Brown
... ... the latter." State v. Winona & St. Peter R. Co ... 21 Minn. 472. Where the contract ... ...
-
Noyes v. Brown
... ... State v. Winona, etc., Co., 21 Minn. 472.Where the contract provided that the ... ...