Charlotte, Columbia & Augusta Railroad v. Gibbes
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA. The court stated the case as follows: The plaintiff below, and in error, The Charlotte, Columbia and Augusta Railroad Company, is a corporation existing under the laws of the States of North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA. The court stated the case as follows: The plaintiff below, and in error, The Charlotte, Columbia and Augusta Railroad Company, is a corporation existing under the laws of the States of North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia. Its road and other property are situated -in. the county of Richmond, Georgia, and in the counties of Aiken, Edgefield, Lexington, Richland, Fairfield, Chester and York, South Carolina, an4 in the county of Mecklenberg, North Carolina. By the legislature of South Carolina a general railroad law was passed in…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Field
Notwithstanding the several objections taken in the complaint to the assessment and tax upon the railroad companies to meet the expenses and salaries of the railroad commissioners, the argument of counsel on the hearing was confined to the supposed conflict of the laws authorizing the tax with the inhibition of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. All other objections were deemed to be disposed of by the decision of the Supreme Court of the State, that the laws complained of are not in conflict with its constitution.
The property of railroad companies in South*.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Barbier v. ConnollySupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- County of Mobile v. KimballSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Soon Hing v. CrowleySupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. HumesSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Pembina Consolidated Silver Mining & Milling Co. v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by85 opinions
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Smyth v. AmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fé Railway Co. v. EllisSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Smyth v. Ames; Smyth v. Smith; Smyth v. HigginsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Noble State Bank v. HaskellSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
80 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.