People v. Weaver
| Decision Date | 01 October 1879 |
| Citation | 25 L.Ed. 705,100 U.S. 539 |
| Parties | PEOPLE v. WEAVER |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
ERROR to the Court of Appeals of the State of New York.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Mr. George F. Edmunds and Mr. Matthew Hale for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. R. W. Peckham, contra.
The law of the State of New York for taxation in the county of Albany, enacted in the year 1850, contained the following section:——
'. - In the year 1866, the legislature of that State enacted on this subject another law, the first section of which reads as follows:——
'.
William J. Weaver, Edward Brennan, and Robert H. Weir, the defendants in error, constituting the board of assessors of the city of Albany for the year 1875, assessed against Chauncey P. Williams, the relator, the sum of $38,250, for taxation on account of shares owned by him in the National Albany Exchange Bank, organized under the general banking act of Congress. He appeared before this board in due time, and demanded the reduction of this sum to the amount of one dollar, and accompanied the demand with this affidavit:——
'CITY AND COUNTY OF ALBANY, ss.:
'I, Chauncey P. Williams, being duly sworn, do depose and say that the value of personal estate owned by me, including my bank stock, after deducting my just debts and my property invested in the stock of corporations or associations liable to be taxed therefor, and my investments in the obligations of the United States, does not exceed the sum of one dollar.
'C. P. WILLIAMS.
'Subscribed and sworn before me, this twenty-eighth day of September, 1875.
'JAMES MAHER, Notary Public.'
The defendants refused to make this deduction; and, under the procedure in the courts of New York, which allows of an amicable suit on an agreed statement of facts, the case finally came to the Court of Appeals of that State. The judgment there being in favor of defendants, the People of the State of New York, on the relation of Williams, bring the record to this court by writ of error. Three questions were raised and decided in the Supreme Court, and its judgment was affirmed in the Court of Appeals. They are thus stated in the record:——
'The case coming on for argument on the submission thereof, after hearing Mr. Hale, of counsel for relator, and Mr. Peckham, of counsel for defendants, the court decides:——
'1st, That it was not the duty of the defendants, as assessors of the city of Albany, to comply with the demand made by said relator, and reduce his assessments to the sum of one dollar, and answer the first question submitted in the negative.
'2d, That, under the law of the State of New York, referred to in the second question, and passed April 23, 1866, the defendants, as such assessors, were justified in refusing to reduce the relator's assessment on his shares of bank stock mentioned in said submission to the sum of one dollar, and answers the second question in the affirmative.
'3d, That the said law of the State of New York, passed April 23, 1866, is not in violation of any law of the United States relating to the amount of taxes on shares of national banking associations, and answers the third question submitted in the negative.
'Judgment is therefore ordered for the defendants against the relator, with costs.'
Of the second of these propositions this court has no jurisdiction, but must accept the decision of the highest court of the State, that the act of 1866 took the money invested in bank shares out of the general provision of the law of 1850, which allowed a deduction of the debts owing by the shareholder from the value of the personal property as a basis for laying the tax. In that respect, we are bound by the decision of the Court of Appeals as the true construction of the State statute. The first proposition is but the necessary result of the case, if the other two are decided in favor of defendants by that court. We have thus left for our consideration the third proposition, which, being decided against a right asserted by plaintiff under the act of Congress establishing the national banking system, presents a question reviewable by this court. We proceed to consider it.
The Court of Appeals delivered no formal opinion in the present case; but, in the entry of their judgment, which is part of the record, they say, 'This judgment is upon the authority of the former decision of this court, rendered in the case of The People v. Dolan and Others, 36 N. Y. 59.'
The opinion in that case is before us. It decides directly the question now presented, and, if sound, justifies the judgment of the court in this case. We have given it the careful consideration which the high character of the court demands at out hands. The question arises on the provision of the national bank law concerning taxation of the shares of the banks, which is thus expressed in sect. 5219 of the Revised Statutes, in force at the time of this assessment:——
'Nothing herein shall prevent all the shares in any association from being included in the valuation of personal property of the owner or holder of such shares, in assessing taxes imposed by authority of the State within which the association is located, . . . subject only to the two restrictions, that the taxation shall not be at a greater rate than is assessed upon other money capital in the hands of individual citizens of such State, and that the shares of any national banking association owned by non-residents of any State shall be taxed in the city or town where the bank is located, and not elsewhere.'
It cannot be disputed,—it is not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Roberts v. American Nat. Bank of Pensacola
... ... a legal assessment against him. See 3 Cooley on Taxation (4th ... Ed.) § 1000; People of the State of New York ex rel ... Amoskeag Sav. Bank of Manchester, N. H., v. Purdy, 231 ... U.S. 373, 34 S.Ct. 114, 58 L.Ed. 274; Aberdeen ... such bank shares. The bill was dismissed on demurrer ... Referring to the cases of People v. Weaver, 100 U.S ... 539, 25 L.Ed. 705, Pelton v. Bank, 101 U.S. 143, 25 ... L.Ed. 901, and Cummings v. Bank, 101 U.S. 153, 25 ... L.Ed. 903, which ... ...
-
State v. Clement Nat. Bank
...banks is taxed to the individual holders by permission of Congress, and could not be taxed without such permission. State of New York v. Weaver, 100 U. S. 539, 25 L. Ed. 705. But it does not follow that congressional authority is needed to enable the state to tax national bank deposits to t......
-
Roberts v. American Nat. Bank of Pensacola
...employed in substantial competition with national banks is a violation of both the letter and spirit of the restriction. People v. Weaver, 100 U.S. 539 (25 L.Ed. 705); Boyer v. Boyer, 113 U.S. 689, 701 (5 S.Ct. 706, L.Ed. 1089); National Bank of Wellington v. Chapman, 173 U.S. 205, 216 (19 ......
-
American Fire Ins. Co. v. King Lumber & Mfg. Co.
... ... $1,500, and suggested to repliant that there be substituted ... for the lastmentioned policy a policy in a like sum in the ... People's National Fire Insurance Company of ... Philadelphia. This information coming from the said Lowry & ... Prince, the agents of the defendant, and ... court to the statutes of its own state. Leffingwell v ... Warren, 2 Black, 599 [17 L.Ed. 261]; People v ... Weaver, 100 U.S. 539, 541 [25 L.Ed. 705]; Noble v ... Mitchell, 164 U.S. 367, 372 [17 S.Ct. 110, 41 L.Ed ... 472], and cases there cited.' ... ...