The Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad Company, Plaintiff In Error v. the State of Maryland

Decision Date01 December 1850
Citation51 U.S. 376,13 L.Ed. 461,10 How. 376
PartiesTHE PHILADELPHIA, WILMINGTON AND BALTIMORE RAILROAD COMPANY, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR, v. THE STATE OF MARYLAND
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

51 U.S. 376
10 How. 376
13 L.Ed. 461
THE PHILADELPHIA, WILMINGTON AND BALTIMORE RAILROAD
COMPANY, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
THE STATE OF MARYLAND.
December Term, 1850

Page 377

ERROR to the Court of Appeals for the Western Shore of Maryland.

This was an action of indebitatus assumpsit, brought by the defendant in error, in the Baltimore County Court, to recover certain state taxes assessed upon the real and personal property of the plaintiff in error, being in Harford County in the state of Maryland.

The suit was docketed by consent, with an agreement that a judgment pro forma should be entered for the plaintiff, now defendant in error, upon a statement of facts. An appeal was taken from this judgment to the Court of Appeals, where it was affirmed pro forma, and the present writ of error was afterwards sued out. The statement of facts was as follows:

'The Philadelphia, Wilmington, and Baltimore Railroad Company' was formed by an agreement of union, duly made and entered into between the following corporations, to wit, the Baltimore and Port Deposit Railroad Company, the Wilmington and Susquehanna Railroad Company, and 'the Philadelphia, Wilmington, and Baltimore Railroad Company,' of Pennsylvania. This agreement of Union was made on the day of its date, under the authority claimed under and in pursuance of the directions of the several acts of assembly therein recited, and was entered into after the primary meetings of stockholders, as required by said several acts. A copy of said agreement is herewith produced as a part of this statement, marked exhibit A. 'The Baltimore and Port Deposit Railroad Company' was incorporated by the act of 1831, chap. 288, of the General Assembly of Maryland; 'the Wilmington and Susquehanna Railroad Company' (one of the parties to said agreement maked exhibit A) was formed by an agreement of union duly made and entered into on the 18th day of April, 1835, between the Delaware and Maryland Railroad Company and the Wilmington and Susquehanna Railroad Company (of Delaware), in virtue and in strict pursuance of the several

Page 378

acts in said agreement of union recited, to wit, an act of the General Assembly of the state of Delaware, passed on the 24th day of July, 1835, and an act of the General Assembly of the state of Maryland, passed at December session, 1835, chap. 93, and was certified and recorded as directed by said several acts. The said corporation, 'the Delaware and Maryland Railroad Company,' was incorporated by the act of 1831, chap. 296, of the General Assembly of Maryland; 'the Wilmington and Susquehanna Railroad Company' (of Delaware) was incorporated by an act of the General Assembly of the state of Delaware, passed on the 18th day of January, 1832; 'the Philadelphia, Wilmington, and Baltimore Railroad Company' (of Pennsylvania) was originally chartered by an act of the General Assembly of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, approved on the 2d day of April, 1831, by the name of the 'Philadelphia and Delaware County Railroad Company,' which, by a supplement to said act, passed the 14th day of March, 1836, was changed to the corporate name of the Philadelphia, Wilmington, and Baltimore Railroad Company. The agreement of union by which the 'Philadelphia, Wilmington, and Baltimore Railroad Company,' the party to this suit, was formed, (of which said exhibit A is a copy,) was made by authority and in pursuance of the act of the General Assembly of Maryland, passed at December session, 1837, chap. 30, and other corresponding acts of the General Assembly of the state of Delaware and the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, recited in said agreement of union, marked exhibit A. All which said acts of assembly of the states of Maryland, Delaware, and Pennsylvania, above referred to, or referred to in said exhibit A, relating to the incorporation and charter of the defendant, are to be regarded as part of this statement, and, to save the trouble of transcribing them, either party may read them from the printed statutes; to have the same effect as if they were transcribed into this statement, or regularly certified copies of the same filed herewith.

The railroad of the defendant extends from the city of Baltimore, in Maryland, to the city of Philadelphia, in Pennsylvania, passing through the counties of Baltimore, Harford, and Cecil, in Maryland, and thence over a part of the states of Delaware and Pennsylvania. That portion of said railroad which lies west of the Susquehanna River, that is to say, between the city of Baltimore and the said river, lying partly in Baltimore County and partly in Harford County, was made and constructed (prior to the agreement of union of which exhibit A is a copy), and owned in severalty by 'the Baltimore and Port Deposit Railroad Company.' That portion of said railroad

Page 379

which lies east of the Susquehanna, and between that river and the divisional line between the states of Delaware and Pennsylvania, was made by the Wilmington and Susquehanna Railroad Company, and (prior to the said agreement of union, of which exhibit A is a copy) was owned in severalty by said last-mentioned company. Previous to the consolidation of 'the Delaware and Maryland Railroad Company' and 'the Wilmington and Susquehanna Railroad Company' (of Delaware) into one company, the line of the road which the said corporation, 'the Delaware and Maryland Railroad Company,' was authorized to make, was that part of said road which lay east of the Susquehanna, and between that river and the divisional line between the states of Maryland and Delaware, and that part of said road which the said corporation, 'the Wilmington and Susquehanna Railroad Company' (of Delaware), was authorized to make, is that part of said road which lies between the divisional lines of the states of Maryland and Delaware and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania each of said last-mentioned corporations, prior to the consolidation, had commenced the location and construction of their said several parts; but at the time of their consolidation under their agreement of union aforesaid, neither part was completed, but the whole was completed by the Wilmington and Susquehanna Railroad Company, after their agreement of union aforesaid. The River Susquehanna is passed over by the use of a steamboat belonging to the defendant, the said Philadelphia, Wilmington, and Baltimore Railroad Company, and used by said defendant for the sole and exclusive purpose of transporting persons and property across said river, from shore to shore, from the terminus of the railroad track on the other shore; said steamboat is especially constructed for its use in connection with said railroad, and has rails laid on its upper deck which are so constructed that the said rails are placed in juxtaposition with the railroad track of the railroad when the boat is in place for use, in connection with the terminus of the road on either shore; cars are received upon the said deck of said steamboat from the railroad track on one shore, and passed over the river by the said steamboat, and on to the railroad track on the other shore from off said boat, as the means of passing cars, &c., across the river; and prior to the agreement of union, of which exhibit A is a copy, was owned jointly, but in unequal parts, by the Baltimore and Port Deposit Railroad Company and the Wilmington and Susquehanna Railroad Company, and was managed and kept in repair at the joint expense, in the proportion of their respective interest therein, by the said last-mentioned two companies.

Page 380

The said steamboat, before and since the said agreement of union of which exhibit A is a copy, usually remained, and still usually remains, in a dock constructed in the Susquehanna River by protecting piers projecting from the Harford shore, when not actually in use; which dock is on the west shore of the Susquehanna River, and within the limits of Harford County. That part of said road which lies east of the divisional line between the states of Delaware and Pennsylvania, and thence extending to the city of Philadelphia, was, prior to the said agreement of union of which exhibit A is a copy, constructed and owned in severalty by the said corporation, called the Philadelphia, Wilmington, and Baltimore Railroad Company (of Pennsylvania). The principal office of the defendant, (ever since the agreement of union of which exhibit A is a copy,) for the transaction of the business of said company, has been established and held in the city of Philadelphia, at the eastern terminus of said railroad.

The stated meetings of the board of directors, by the terms of said agreement of union, are to be held alternately at Wilmington and Philadelphia. There are offices at Philadelphia, Wilmington, and Baltimore, at any one of which transfers of stock may be made; the stated meetings of the stockholders were to be held in the city of Wilmington. Prior to said agreement of union, the principal office of the Baltimore and Port Deposit Railroad Company was held in the city of Baltimore, and the principal office of the defendant within the state of Maryland has been, and is now, in said city, at which place one of the vice-presidents of the said corproation resides. All the corporate funds and capital stock of said defendant have been expended and contained in the location and construction of said road, and in the construction of such works and improvements as were necessary and expedient to the proper completion and use of said road, and in the purchase of cars and machinery of transportation, &c., necessary and indispensable to the completion and use of said road; and the said company has not, at any time, since...

To continue reading

Request your trial
68 cases
  • Kansas City v. Fairfax Drainage Dist., 38.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • 29 Julio 1929
    ... ...         "Plaintiff alleges that during the years 1923, 1924 and ... by demurrer, on the ground that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, ... Philadelphia & W. R. Co. v. Maryland, 10 How. (51 U. S.) 376, ... ...
  • Hughes v. State
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • 6 Agosto 1992
    ... ... be in lieu of all taxes to which the company or the stock holders therein, would otherwise be ... case, this court determined that the plaintiff had established that ORS 656.634 created a ... unequivocal terms.' " (quoting from Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad Co. v ... v. Maryland, supra, 51 U.S. (10 How) at 393, quoted with ... the contract is all that the plaintiff in error claims it to be, and the Constitution and ... ...
  • Adams v. Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad Co.
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • 22 Noviembre 1898
    ... 24 So. 200 77 Miss. 194 WIRT ADAMS, STATE REVENUE AGENT, v. YAZOO & MISSISSIPPI VALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY AND YAZOO & MISSISSIPPI VALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY ... To this plea the ... plaintiff interposed fourteen replications, seven of which ... subject-matter are the same. See Wilmington v ... Alsbrook, 146 U.S. 279, 302. Besides, ... O. & T. into the ... Y. & M. V. Philadelphia, etc., R. R. v. Maryland, 10 ... How., 276; ... was devoted to a consideration of points of error (of which ... seventy-one were assigned) not ... ...
  • Knoxville & O.R. Co. v. Harris
    • United States
    • Tennessee Supreme Court
    • 3 Diciembre 1897
    ... ... the Knoxville & Ohio Railroad Company against James A ... Harris, state ... 195, 12 S.Ct. 406; ... Philadelphia, W. & B. R. Co. v. State, 10 How. 376 ... In ... 1; Brown v. State of ... Maryland, 12 Wheat. 419; Welton v. State of ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT