State v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co.
Can I rely on this case?
Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.
(as of 9/30/2026)
Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1941, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.
Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error
Cases that cite this one
14 later published cases cite this decision.
- State v. Railway Express Agency, Inc. (Minn. 1941)
- State v. Duluth, Missabe & Northern Railway Co. (Minn. 1939)
- State v. Northern Pacific Railway Co. (Minn. 1915)
- Holland v. Holland (Ga. 1966)
- State v. Minneapolis St. Louis Railroad Co. (Minn. 1939)
- First Trust Co. v. Commonwealth Co. (8th Cir. 1938)
- State v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. (Minn. 1930)
- State v. Great Northern Railway Co. (Minn. 1925)
- State v. Minnesota & International Railway Co. (Minn. 1908)
- Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Ry. Co. v. Jenkins (Ill. 1898)
- County of Traverse v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co. (Minn. 1898)
- Hendrickson v. Town of Queen (Minn. 1921)
- Duluth Loan & Land Co. v. Klovdahl (Minn. 1893)
- State v. Northern Pacific Railroad (Minn. 1884)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The only question in this case is, does the $40,-000 per annum which the Northern Pacific Railroad Company pays to defendant for the right to run its trains over defendant’s lines from Sauk Rapids to St. Paul, from St. Cloud to East St. Cloud, and from Minneapolis (west) to East Minneapolis, come within the term of “gross earnings,” upon which, according to the act from which the defendant derives its existence, 3 per centum is to be paid in lieu of taxes ?
The part of the act (Laws 1857, Ex. Sess., c. 1, sube. 1, § 18,) which provides for the payment of such per centum, reads: “In consideration of the grants, privileges, and franchises herein conferred on the said Minnesota & Pacific Railroad Company, the said company shall and will, on or before the first day of March in each year, pay into the treasury of the territory or future state three per centum of the gross earnings of the said railroad for the year ending on the last day of the preceding December, in lieu of all taxes and assessments whatever.” Further on the section provides: “For the purpose of ascertaining the said earnings, an accurate account shall be kept by said company of all receipts and expenditures on account of the operation of said railroads, and abstracts thereof shall be furnished by said company to the treasurer of the territory or state.” No provision is made for ascertaining or certifying to the treasurer any receipts other than those mentioned in this clause, to wit, those “on account of the operation of said railroads.” It is clear that those are the only receipts of which any account is to be taken between the company and the state; and, as that account is to be kept
Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.