Yazoo & M.V.R. Co. v. Adams

• Decision Date: 18 November 1902
• Citation: 81 Miss. 90,32 So. 937
• Parties: YAZOO & MISSISSIPPI VALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY ET AL. v. WIRT ADAMS, STATE REVENUE AGENT
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court

32 So. 937

81 Miss. 90

YAZOO & MISSISSIPPI VALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY ET AL. v. WIRT ADAMS, STATE REVENUE AGENT

Supreme Court of Mississippi

November 18, 1902

FROM the chancery court of, first district, Hinds county. Hon HENRY C. CONN, Chancellor.

Wirt Adams, state revenue agent, appellee was the complainant in the court below; the Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad Company and the Illinois Central Railroad Company appellants were defendants there. From a decree in complainant's favor defendants appealed to the supreme court. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

For previous cases between the parties relative to back taxes and questions arising thereon, see Yazoo, etc., R. R. Co. v Adams, 73 Miss. 648; Adams v. Yazoo, etc., R. R Co., 75 Miss. 275; Yazoo, etc., R. R. Co. v. Adams, 76 Miss. 545; Adams v. Yazoo, etc., R. R. Co., 77 Miss. 194; Adams v. Yazoo, etc., R. R. Co., 77 Miss. 764; Yazoo, etc., R. R. Co. v. Adams, 77 Miss. 780; Illinois, etc., R. R. Co. v. Adams, 78 Miss,, 895; Yazoo, etc., R. R. Co. v. Adams, 78 Miss. 977; Illinois, etc., R. R. Co. v. Adams, 93 F. 852 (s.c., 35 C. C. A., 635); Yazoo, etc., R. R. Co. v. Adams, 180 U.S. 1; Yazoo, etc., R. R. Co. v. Adams, 180 U.S. 26; Yazoo, etc., R. R. Co. v. Adams, 180 U.S. 41; Illinois, etc., R. R. Co. v. Adams, 180 U. S, 28; Yazoo, etc., R. R. Co. v. Adams, 181 U.S. 580.

Judgment affirmed.

Mayes & Harris and J. M. Dickinson, for appellant.

Critz de Beckett, Green & Green, and J. A. P. Campbell, for appellee.

Argued orally by Edward Mayes, for appellant, and by J. A. P. Campbell, Marcellus Green, R. C. Beckett, and Frank A. Critz, for appellee.

OPINION

CAYCE, Sp. J. ^[*]

This suit was brought by appellee against the railroad property formerly owned by the Louisville, New Orleans & Texas Railroad Company, including the Natchez, Jackson & Columbus Railroad Company, for the ad valorem taxes claimed to be due thereon for the years 1886 to 1891, inclusive, and to enforce a lien therefor on the part of the line of said railroad extending from the Louisiana state line, on the south, to the Tennessee state line, on the north, a distance of about 315 miles, and upon the branches of said road--one known as the Tallahatchie Branch, about the distance of 39 miles, and a part of the branch known as the Riverside Division, or Loop, a distance of about 86 miles. The suit is brought under the act of 1894 (Laws, 1894, p. 29), authorizing the revenue agent to sue for and recover back taxes. It is a proceeding wholly in rem, no personal judgment being sought. The suit against that part of the line above mentioned was numbered, originally, No. 1,449. This suit includes a similar claim for ad valorem back taxes for same period on the property known as the Natchez, Jackson & Columbus Railroad; the last-named road having been purchased by the Louisville, New Orleans & Texas Railroad Company in the year 1890. This suit was numbered, originally, No. 1,681. The two suits were consolidated in the lower court, to facilitate trial, each party reserving the right to interpose any and all defenses or claims as if no consolidation had occurred. Judgment was rendered in the lower court for appellee for the amount claimed, and the property mentioned subjected to the payment of said judgment. Appeal was taken therefrom to this court, and appellants assign errors as follows: That the court below erred: "(1) In not granting application to remove case No. 1,681 (original) to the federal court. (2) That the property was not liable to be assessed for back taxes, as claimed, because the ad valorem taxes for said years, pursuant to law, were authorized to be paid by a privilege tax in lieu thereof, rated at a specified sum per mile of said road, and that said privilege tax was paid, pursuant to law, by the appropriation of the amount of each year's taxes on said line of road to the debt incurred in the construction of said road, pursuant to the provisions of sec. 21 of the Mobile & Northwestern Railroad Company charter (Laws, 1870, p. 268), which said sec. 21 was incorporated in the charters of the companies [railroads] constructing said road; said roads being afterwards consolidated into the Louisville, New Orleans & Texas Railroad Company, and said sec. 21 being also incorporated into the act of the legislature authorizing said consolidation; said railroads not having been able to pay out of their earnings the dividend of 8 per cent as provided in said sec. 21. (3) That the Illinois Central Railroad Company was a bona fide purchaser of said property for a valuable consideration, without notice of any taxes being due or claimed upon said property. (4) That the state was estopped in this case from claiming said sec. 21, and the acts of the legislature amendatory thereof, to be in violation of the constitution of 1869 of Mississippi." Appellants also insist that this court has no power to examine and determine questions of fact appearing in the record, but which were not considered and acted upon by the lower court. To these defenses appellee interposes the following objections: "(1) That these defenses were interposed by appellants before the railroad assessors at the time of the assessment under which this suit was instituted was being considered by them, and was considered by said railroad assessors, and by them adjudged against appellants, and by reason thereof became res adjudicata: that the order of the railroad assessors making the assessment was conclusive, and not subject to collateral attack. (2) That the same defenses had been interposed in previous suits in the supreme court of this state between the parties hereto, and had been in said suits adjudged against appellants, and by reason thereof become and were res adjudicata of the legal questions involved, and, if not res adjudicata, were conclusive against appellants under the rule of stare decisis. (3) That sec. 21 of the Mobile & Northwestern Railroad Company, and the acts of the legislature amendatory thereof, had been repealed by subsequent acts of the legislature and by the code of 1880, and that the attempted exemption or appropriation of taxes by said sec. 21 was in violation of the constitution of 1869, and void ab initio. (4) That the railroad was constructed by a railroad company whose charter contained no exemption or appropriation of taxes, and that the construction of the branch roads by the Louisville, New Orleans & Texas road did not entitle them to claim exemption of said branches from taxation. (5) That the roads had been able to pay out of their earnings a dividend of 8 per cent upon their capital stock, over and above their proper debts and liabilities, and for that reason were not entitled to claim exemption from taxation."

In the scope of the investigation necessary for the proper comprehension and application of the legal principles involved, we are much indebted to counsel for the industry and ability and the thoroughness with which they have presented the various questions to us, leaving the court but little to do, save collate and apply the principles invited by the facts.

The portion of the railroad line upon which the taxes are claimed extends from the Louisiana state line, on the south, to the Tennessee state line, upon the north, passing through portions of the counties of Amite, Franklin, Jefferson Claiborne, and Warren, south of Vicksburg, a distance of about 101 miles; thence northward, through portions of the counties of Warren, Issaquena, Sharkey, Washington, Bolivar, Coahoma, Tunica, and De Soto, a distance of about 214 miles; aggregating upon the main line a distance of 315 miles in Mississippi; and also upon a part of the Riverside Division, extending from Wilzinski to Coahoma station, on the north, and from Hampton to Rolling-fork on the south--an aggregate distance of about 86 miles on the Loop, or Riverside Division, and also upon the Tallahatchie Branch, extending from Clarksdale to Minter City, a distance of about 39 miles. In March, 1895, the revenue agent filed notice with the railroad commissioners, who by the law are rail-road assessors, that the property above described had escaped taxation by reason of not having been assessed for the years 1886 to 1901, inclusive, and named the Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad Company and the Illinois Central Railroad Company as owners. In April, 1895, the revenue agent filed with said commissioners additional notice, with interrogatories for said owners to answer as follows: "(1) When the main line, Riverside Division, and Tallahatchie Branch were constructed. (2) The cost of construction, amount of donations, amount of stock, amount paid for same, and the earnings, gross and net; the nature and character of affidavits filed, and of the receipts obtained from the sheriffs." Order was made by the railroad commissioners, requiring the appellants to answer. Appellants answered by averting that the railroad assessors had no authority to assess the taxes for the years named; that the commutation law had been accepted for said years, and therefore ad valorem taxes were not necessary to be assessed, and hence the land had not escaped taxation. The objections of appellants to the making of assessments were overruled by the commissioners, and schedules of the property, as required by law, were ordered to be filed by appellants with the commissioners by the first Monday of August, 1895. Appellants declined to answer the interrogatories, and the matters were set for hearing on the first Monday of September, 1895. On the 27th of August, 1895, appellants filed a bill and obtained an injunction against the railroad commissioners and revenue agent to prevent the assessment of said property. On September 28, 1895, the injunction was dissolved....