|
difficulty, because the right to merge is
not a right that may hereafter be granted
by the General Assembly; it is a right
which presently exists by virtue of the
provisions of Article 23 of the Annotated
Code of Maryland.
Consequently, in order to pick up any
time lag there we want to have it spe-
cifically set forth here that should the
B&O Railroad seek to merge immediately
after the passage of the Constitutional
Convention, that this act shall be con-
sidered to be tantamount to accepting a
benefit now existing, and therefore shall
amount to the surrender of the tax exemp-
tion.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Gleason.
DELEGATE GLEASON: I would like
to ask the Chairman of the Committee a
question, if I may.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Gallagher,
will you yield to a question?
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: Yes, sir.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Gleason.
DELEGATE GLEASON: Do I under-
stand then that the intent of the amend-
ment is to place an obstacle, if we can use
that in a rather general sense, in the face
of the merger of the B&'O and the other
railroad, which would have the effect that
if the corporate officials of both railroads
go ahead and decide to merge their rail-
roads and they get the approval of the
Interstate Commerce Commission, there-
after they shall have lost their tax exemp-
tion?
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: No.
The purpose of it is merely to put the
B&O and all corporations similarly situ-
ated upon the passage of this Constitu-
tion as existed prior to the passage of
this Constitution.
The B&O and C&O have already agreed
to merge. They have yet to take the formal
steps in Maryland in order to accomplish
the merger, so we are not attempting to
stand in the way of the merger. But we
want the same legal effect to take place
if they do so under this constitution that
would have taken place had they done so
under the 1867 Constitution.
The reason why I suggest the language
is this: that when this particular section
was passed in 1891 we had not as yet
|
passed the section of law setting up the
State Department of Assessments and Tax-
ation, which I think occurred in 1910. A
general law set up this corporation ar-
ticle. Any corporation, therefore, after
1891, particularly beginning with 1910,
which sought to go the route of merging
itself with another corporation would do
so by virtue of Article 23, a general law,
and this was a law which was passed after
1891. It was a general law which was
thereafter in the sense of looking forward
prospectively from 1891.
Now, what we seek to do here is to
merely pick up the fact that there has
been a general law which has been passed
which the B&O actually might take ad-
vantage of if it decides to carry out its
contractual agreement to merge, and we
want the same legal affect to flow, that is
to say, the surrender of its taxation ex-
emption, which would have occurred under
the 1867 Constitution.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Gleason.
DELEGATE GLEASON: It is precisely
this point that bothers me, because it seems
to me that we are dealing here with a
legislative matter, and maybe I could
make my question more specific:
Is there anything in this amendment
which if it is adopted would preclude the
General Assembly, if this merger does
take effect, and I know absolutely nothing
about the merger, from granting or con-
tinuing a tax exemption for the B&O or
the new corporate enterprise, whichever
form it may take?
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Gallagher.
DELEGATE GALLAGHER: There is
no more disability upon the General As-
sembly to grant a tax exemption than
existed prior to the passage of this con-
stitution. I am not so sure that such a
grant might not be discriminatory and
illegal under our present Constitution and
laws, but I want to stress only the fact
that anything the General Assembly could
do prior to the passage of this constitution
it can do after its passage, and the only
purpose of this amendment is to keep the
situation in the same condition as existed
prior to the passage of the constitution.
THE PRESIDENT: Delegate Gleason.
DELEGATE GLEASON: Then I really
question your prior answer, because I take
it that if this amendment is adopted, if the
B&O decides to merge with this railroad,
then they have lost their tax exemption?
|
