Majority — FIELD J.
Syllabus
1. The Northeastern Railroad Company was incorporated by the legislature of the State of South Carolina in 1851 for fifty years, and the usual powers of railroad companies were granted to it. At that time a general law of the State was in existence, passed in 1841, which enacted that the charter of every corporation subsequently granted, and any renewal, amendment, or modification thereof, should be subject to amendment, alteration, or repeal by legislative authority, unless the act granting the charter or the renewal, amendment, or modification, in express terms excepted it from the operation of that law. In 1855 the legislature passed an amendment to the charter of the company, providing that its stock, and the real estate it then owned, or might thereafter acquire, connected with or subservient to the works authorized by its charter, should be exempt from taxation during the continuance of the charter. This act contained no clause excepting the amendment from the provisions of the general law of 1841. In 1868 the constitution of the State was adopted, which requires that the property of corporations then existing or thereafter created, shall be subject to taxation, except in certain cases, not affecting this case. The subsequent legislation of this State carried out this requirement and provided for the taxation of the property of railroad companies, and under it the property of the Northeastern Railroad Company was taxed; Held, that the taxation was legal and constitutional; that the power reserved to the State by the law of 1841 authorized any change in the contract created by the charter between the corporators and the State, as it originally existed, or as subsequently modified, or its entire revocation.delivered the opinion of the court.
The constitution of South Carolina, adopted in 1868, declares that the property of corporations then existing or thereafter created, shall be subject to taxation, except in certain cases, not material to the present inquiry. The sub-’ sequent legislation of the State carried out this requirement and provided for the taxation of the property of railroad companies; and the question presented is, whether the act of December, 1855, to amend the charter of the Northeastern Railroad Company, exempted the property of that company from such taxation. The company was incorporated in 1851, and at that time a general law of the State was in existence, passed in 1841, which enacted that the charter of every corporation subsequently granted, and any renewal, amendment, or modification thereof, should be subject to amendment, alteration, or repeal by legislative authority, unless the act granting the charter or the renewal, amendment, or modification, in express terms excepted it from the operation of that law. The provisions of that law, therefore, constituted the condition upon -which every charter of a corporation subsequently granted was held, and upon which every amendment or modification was made. They were as operative and as much a part of the charter and amendment, as if incorporated into them.
The act amending the charter of the Northeastern Railroad Company, passed in December, 1855, provided that the stock of the company, and the real estate it then owned, or might thereafter acquire, connected with or subservient to the works authorized by its charter, should be exempted from taxation during the continuance of the charter. This act contained no clause excepting the amendment from the provisions of the general law of 1841. It was, therefore, itself subject to repeal by force of that law.
It is true that the charter of the company when accepted by the corporators constituted a contract between them and
There is no subject over which it is of greater moment for the State to preserve its power than that of taxation. It has nevertheless been held by this court, not, however, without occasional earnest dissent from a minority, that? the power of taxation over particular parcels of property, or over property of particular persons or corporations, may be surrendered by one legislative body, so as to bind its successors and the State. It was so adjudged at an early day in New Jersey v. Wilson;[1] the adjudication was affirmed in Jefferson Bank v. Shelly,[2] and has been repeated in several cases within the past few years, and notably so in the cases of The Home of the Friendless v. Rouse[3] and Wilmington Railroad v. Reed.[4] In these cases, and in others of a similar character, the exemption is upheld as being made upon considerations mov
* 7 Cranch, 164 .
† † 1 Black, 486 .
‡ ‡ 8 Wallace, 480.
§ § 18 Id. 264.
Decree reversed, and the cause remanded with directions to
Dismiss the suit.