Southern Sand & Material Co. v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Pulaski Chancery Court; Jno. E Martinecm, Chancellor; Under section 851 of Kirby’s Digest,- .appellant was given the same power as a natural person to acquire and hold property, .and taxes have been, land- are, collected from it on that theory.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pulaski Chancery Court; Jno. E Martinecm, Chancellor; Under section 851 of Kirby’s Digest,- .appellant was given the same power as a natural person to acquire and hold property, .and taxes have been, land- are, collected from it on that theory. The Act of 1913, while not denying to the appellant the right to -enjoy the common property, attempts to charge more than is charged other tax payers and other persons who are similar in every respect, so far as the reason of the act is concerned, except in name. The question involved here is whether this inequality is justified by placing…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.
This is an action instituted by the Attorney General, in the name of the State, against appellant, a domestic corporation, to recover the price of the aggregate quantity of sand and gravel taken by appellant from the bed of the Arkansas river. It was instituted under an act of the General Assembly of 1913, which act provides that a “railway company, Corporation or company may take from said navigable stream sand .and gravel by paying into the State treasury the sum of not less than 4c per cubic yard for sand and not less than 5c per cubic yard for gravel.” There was a trial of the case upon…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State ex rel. Moose v. Southern Sand & Material Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1914
3Cited by2 opinions
- Lake Land Co. v. State ex rel. Attorney GeneralIndiana Court of Appeals · 1918
- Union Sand & Material Co. v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1917