The provisions in the charters granted in 1845 to the
Southwestern and Muscogee Railroads limiting their tax liabilities
to a certain percent of net income are to be construed like similar
provisions in the earlier charters of the Augusta & Waynesboro
(1838)
et al. (
cf. s.c.,
248 U. S. 248 U.S.
525;
Wright v. Central of Georgia Ry. Co., 236 U.
S. 674) as extending to a lessee, there being no ground
to hold that the policy of the legislature had changed in the
interim, although provisions in the earlier charters affording
express evidence that it contemplated the income derived from
letting as well as that from using and sharing the railroads are
absent from the later charters. P.
250 U. S.
523.
The policy remained the same when express power to let was given
in 1852. P.
250 U. S.
524.
Merger of the Muscogee with the Southwestern under an Act of
1856 did not affect the tax exemption.
Id.
The court finds nothing in the later statutes or constitutions
of Georgia that attempts to supplant or impair the tax limitations
in the charters of the Southwestern and Muscogee Railroads.
Id.
146 Ga. 406 reversed.
Page 250 U. S. 520
In this case, a rehearing was granted
"insofar as the validity of the tax in question is involved in
or depends upon the charters of the Southwestern and the Muscogee
Railroad and the subsequent relevant legislation."
As to all other questions, leave to file the application was
denied.
249 U. S. 590.
The judicial history of the charter tax exemptions is to be
found in the following cases:
Central R. & Banking Co. v.
Macon (1871), 43 Ga. 605;
Central R. & Banking Co. v.
State (1874), 54 Ga. 401;
Southwestern R. Co. v.
State (1874), 54 Ga. 401;
Central R. & Banking Co. v.
Georgia (1875),
92 U. S. 665;
Southwestern R. Co. v. Georgia (1875);
Wright v.
Southwestern R. Co., 64 Ga. 783;
Southwestern R. Co. v.
Wright (1886),
116 U. S. 231;
Central R. & Banking Co. v. Wright (1896),
164 U. S. 327;
Wright v. Central of Georgia Ry. Co. (1915),
236 U.
S. 674;
Central of Georgia Ry. Co. v. Wright
(1919),
248 U. S. 525.
Page 250 U. S. 523
MR. JUSTICE HOLMES delivered the opinion of the Court.
In this case, it was decided at the last term that the plaintiff
in error, the railway company, was exempt from liability to
taxation as lessee of certain roads,
248 U. S. 248 U.S.
525, as it had been decided a few terms earlier that it was exempt
from taxation upon the fee of the same roads.
Page 250 U. S. 524
236 U. S. 674. A
rehearing was granted on the question whether the exemption thus
adjudged to exist extends to portions of the plaintiff in error's
road let to it by the Southwestern Railroad and the Muscogee
Railroad, which were assumed to be embraced in the decision but
were not specially discussed. The consideration of the Court was
directed especially to the charter of the Augusta and Waynesboro
Rail Road granted in 1838 and having features characteristic of the
conception of railroads then entertained.
236 U. S. 236
U.S. 678,
236 U. S. 679.
It is argued that the charters of the other lessors just named,
granted at a later date, even when limiting the corporation's
liability to taxation in similar words, should be construed in a
different way.
The charters of the Southwestern and the Muscogee Railroads were
not granted until 1845, and while, like the earlier ones, they
provided that the said railway and its appurtenances and all
property therewith connected, or the capital stock of the said Rail
Road Company, should not be subject to be taxed higher than
one-half of one percent upon its annual net income, they did not
contain the provisions that showed the legislature in 1838 to
contemplate indifferently a revenue derived from using, from
sharing, or from letting the special privileges granted --
provisions that were of weight in the decision of the Court.
But we are satisfied that, between 1838 and 1845, there had been
no such change in the policy of Georgia as to require the same
words to be given a different meaning at the later date from that
which we have decided that they had at the former. Circumstances
had not changed when express power to let was given in 1852. The
Muscogee was merged in the Southwestern under an Act of 1856, but
the exemption remained superior to legislative change.
Southwestern R. Co. v. Georgia, 92 U. S.
676. As remarked by Chief Justice Waite in a like suit
between the same parties, the language of the exempting clause is
somewhat unusual, and means the railroad specified in the
Page 250 U. S. 525
charter and none other.
Southwestern R. Co. v. Georgia,
116 U. S. 231.
But, conversely, it means that that road shall be exempt while
owned by this corporation. whether used or demised.
We see nothing in the later statutes or Constitutions that
attempts to substitute a new contract or to impair the obligation
of the one originally made. Different opinions were entertained on
the main question which this rehearing does not reopen, but, taking
that as settled, we cannot believe that any real distinction can be
made between the charter of the Augusta and Waynesboro and those of
the Southwestern and Muscogee roads.
The decree of last term must stand, and that of the state court
must be reversed.
Decree reversed.
MR. JUSTICE McKENNA, MR. JUSTICE PITNEY, MR. JUSTICE BRANDEIS
and MR. JUSTICE CLARKE dissent.
