Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 9.djvu/824

 SECOB V. SINGLETON. 809 �Sbcob and others v. Singleton and othera. �(Circuit Court, E. D. Missouri. December 6, 1881.) �1. Demurker to Bill— Veuification— Equity Rule 31. �■A demurrer to a bill in equlty should be certifled by counsel to be, in their opinion, well founded in point of law, and gupported by the affidavit of the defendant that it is not interposed for delay. �2. Taxation — Decisions of State CoimTS (Jovbbn. �The decision of the highest court of a atate upon a question of local taxation la conclusive. �3. Same — Exemptions. �Where the stock of a company is by law exempt from taxation, its property cannot be taxed. Scotland County v. Missouri, loioa, e Nebraska R. Qo. 65 Mo. 120. �In Equity. Demurrer. �The bill alleged that the Alexandria & Bloomfleld Railroad Company was duly incorporated by an act of the general assembly of the state of Missouri, and that by a provision of its charter its stock was made exempt from taxa- tion for the period of 20 years after its completion, which period bas not yet expired ; that said road ran through the counties of Clark, Scotland, and Schuyler, in the state of Missouri, to a point on the northem boundary Une of said state; that said company was after wards consolidated, under the laws of Missouri and lowa, with the lowa Southern Railway Company, a corpo- ration in the state of lowa, and has been since known as the Missouri, lowa & Nebraska Eailway Company; that by virtue of the laws of said states the consolidated company became entitled to all the privileges and immunities of the original corporations ; that said lowa & Nebraska Eailway Company has no property in said counties of Clark, Scotland, and Schuyler, except its road- bed and other property used in the operation of its road ; that taxes had been illegally assessed against said property, and that the defendants, the auditor of the state of Missouri, the judges of the county courts bf said counties, and; others, have combined to compel said company to pay taxes in said counties- upon its property therein situated, and had employed attorneys to institute and maintain suits for taxes assessed against said property; that the com- plainants owned a large amount of stock in said company, and had requestedi the directors and officers of said company, and said company, to refuse to pay said taxes, and to take proper steps to resist the imposition of taxes upon said property ,but that they had ref used to take auy such steps ; and that said company had, through its officers, announced its intention to pay said illegal taxes.. The prayer of the bill was that the taxation of said eompany's property should be declared illegal, and the acts of the auditor and the county officers void and of no effect; and for a writ of injunction to restrain the defendants from. taking any steps towards the assessment of taxes upon the property of said road, or the collection thereof. The defendants demurred to the bill upon the ground that it set forth no ground of action or complaint against them. The ��� �