Western Union Tel Co v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts
| Citation | 125 U.S. 530,31 L.Ed. 790,8 S.Ct. 961 |
| Parties | WESTERN UNION TEL. CO. v. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS |
| Decision Date | 19 March 1888 |
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
[
[Statement of Case from pages 530-543 intentionally omitted]
Geo. S. Hale and Chas. W. Wells, for appellant.
H. C. Bliss, for appellee.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 543-545 intentionally omitted]
This is a writ of error to the circuit court of the United States for the district of Massachusetts. The action was commenced in the supreme judicial court of Massachusetts, sitting in equity, by an information on behalf of the commonwealth, by its attorney general, at the relation of the treasurer thereof, Alanson W. Beard. It was afterwards removed, upon motion of the defendant, the Western Union Telegraph Company, into the circuit court of the United States. The object of the information was to enforce the collection of tax levied by the proper authorities of the state upon the telegraph company, and to enjoin it from the further operation of its telegraph lines within the territorial limits of the commonwealth until that tax was paid. The defendant company is a corporation organized under the laws of the state of New York, having its capital stock divided into shares. The tax assessed by the treasurer of the commonwealth of Massachusetts was based upon an estimate of $750,952 as the taxable value of the shares of the corporation apportioned to that state, the rate of taxation having
been determined for that year, 1885, at $14.14 for and upon each $1,000 of valuation. The mode by which this taxable valuation was arrived at was this: The treasurer ascertained from the officers of the telegraph company that the valuation of its entire capital stock was $47,500,000, from which was deducted the credits proper to be allowed in determining the assessable value, leaving $38,713,924 as the total valuation of said stock liable to taxation. It was then ascertained that the total number of miles of line of said corporation in all the states and territories of this country was 146,052.60, of which 143,219.55 were without the limits of the commonwealth of Massachusetts, leaving 2,833.05 miles within its boundaries. Taking these figures, the treasurer of the state assessed the value of that portion of the capital stock of this company which, under this calculation, would fall within the commonwealth of Massachusetts, at the sum of $750,952. The amount thus arrived at, at the rate of $14.14 upon each $1,000 of valuation, produced the sum of $10,618.46 as the amount of the tax claimed to be due and payable to the treasurer of said commonwealth by that corporation. This sum was demanded of the telegraph company, but it refused to pay the same. The answer of the defendant corporation set up that of its 2,833.05 miles of line within the state of Massachusetts more than 2,334.55 miles were over, under, or across post-roads, made such by the United States, leaving only 498.50 miles not over or along such post-roads, on which the company offered to pay the proportion of the tax assessed according to mileage by the state authorities. The main ground on which the telegraph company resisted the payment of thet ax alleged to be due, and on which probably the case was removed from the state court into the circuit court of the United States, is that it is a violation of the rights conferred on the company by the act of July 24, 1866, now title 65, §§ 5263-5269 of the Revised Statutes. The defendant alleges that it had accepted the provisions of that law, and filed a notification of such acceptance with the postmaster general of the United States June 8, 1867. The argument is, therefore, that by virtue of section 5263 the company has a
right to exercise its functions of telegraphing over so much of its lines as is connected with the military and post-roads of the United States which have been declared to be such by law without being subject to taxation therefor by the state authorities. That section reads as follows:
It is urged that this section, upon its acceptance by this corporation or any of like character, confers a right to do the business of telegraphing which is transacted over the lines so constructed over or along such post-roads without liability to taxation by the state. The argument is very much pressed that it is a tax upon the franchise of the company, which franchise being derived from the United States by virtue of the statute above recited cannot be taxed by a state, and counsel for appellant occasionally speak of the tax authorized by the law of Massachusetts upon this as well as all other corporations doing business within its territory, whether organized under its laws or not, as a tax upon their franchises. But by whatever name it may be called, as described in the laws of Massachusetts, it is essentially an excise upon the capital of the corporation. The laws of that commonwealth attempt to ascertain the just amount which any corporation engaged in business within its limits shall pay as a contribution to the support of its government upon the amount and value of the capital so employed by it therein. The telegraph company, which is the defendant here, derived its franchise to be a corporation and to exercise the func-
tion of telegraphing from the state of New York. It owes its existence, its capacity to contract, its right to sue and be sued, and to exercise the business of telegraphy, to the laws of the state under which it is organized. But the privilege of running the lines of its wires 'through and over any portion of the public domain of the United States, over and along any of the military or post-roads of the United States, * * * and over, under, or across the navigable streams or waters of the United States,' is granted to it by the act of congress. This, however, is merely a permissive statute, and there is no expression in it which implies that this permission to extend its lines along roads not built nor owned by the United States, or over and under navigable streams, or over bridges not built or owned by the federal government, carries with it any exemption from the ordinary burdens of taxation. While the state could not interfere by any specific statute to prevent a corporation from placing its lines along these post-roads, or stop the use of them after they were placed there, nevertheless the company receiving the benefit of the laws of the state for the protection of its property and its rights is liable to betaxed upon its real or personal property as any otherp erson would be. It never could have been intended by the congress of the United States, in conferring upon a corporation of one state the authority to enter the territory of any other state and erect its poles and lines therein, to establish the proposition that such a company owed no obedience to the laws of the state into which it thus entered, and was under no obligation to pay its fair proportion of the taxes necessary to its support. In the case of Telegraph Co. v. Texas, 105 U. S. 460, this question was very fully considered; and while a tax imposed upon every telegram passing over its lines, whether entirely within the state or coming from without its limits, or going from the state out of it, was held to be void so far as related to messages passing through more than one state, as an interference with or a regulation of commerce and with the act of congress we have just been considering, it was distinctly pointed out that if it could be ascertained what tele-
grams were confined wholly within the state, a tax on those might be imposed by it. In that case the chief justice, delivering the opinion of the court, said: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Federal Compress & Warehouse Co. v. McLean
... ... Diffenbaugh, 222 U.S. 42, 56 L.Ed. 83; ... Omaha Elevator Co. v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., ... 249 F. 827; Oil Company v. Central Railroad of ... Erie R. Co., 280 U.S. 101, 74 ... L.Ed. 206; Western Cartridge Co. v. Emmerson, 281 ... U.S. 513, 74 L.Ed. 1007; United States ... 172, 67 L.Ed. 929; Philadelphia & ... Reading R. R. Co. v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 82 ... U.S. 164; Rowland C. Heisler v. Thomas Colliery ... ...
-
Teche Lines, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors of forrest County
... ... State ... ex rel. Knox v. Union Tank Car Company, 151 Miss ... 797, 119 So. 310; Barber Asphalt Paving ... v. State of Ohio, 165. U.S. 194, 41 ... L.Ed. 695; Western Union Tel. Co. v. Massachusetts, ... 125 U.S. 530, 31 L.Ed. 790; ... ...
-
Baltimore & O.S.W.R. Co. v. Commonwealth
... ... 761; Minot v. Philadelphia, Wil. & Balt. R. R ... Co., 18 Wall. 206, 21 L.Ed. 888; Western Union Tel ... Co. v. Massachusetts, 125 U.S. 530, 8 S.Ct. 961, 31 ... L.Ed. 790. It does not ... ...
-
State v. Clement Nat. Bank
...Weaver, 100 U. S. 539, 25 L. Ed. 705; First National Bank v. Kentucky, 9 Wall. 353, 19 L. Ed. 701; Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Attorney General, 125 U. S. 530, 8 Sup. Ct 901, 31 L. Ed. 790. In the case of an ordinary loan the property transferred to the borrower and the debt accruing to ......