Bittinger's Estate
| Decision Date | 28 June 1889 |
| Citation | 129 Pa. 338 |
| Parties | ESTATE OF WM. BITTINGER, DECEASED. |
| Court | Pennsylvania Supreme Court |
Before PAXSON, C. J., STERRETT, GREEN, CLARK, WILLIAMS, McCOLLUM and MITCHELL, JJ.
APPEAL BY THE COMMONWEALTH FROM THE ORPHANS' COURT OF ADAMS COUNTY.
No. 38 May Term 1889, Sup. Ct.; court below, number and term not given.
Page 339
Mr. John F. Sanderson, Deputy Attorney General, and Mr. Wm. McSherry (with them Mr. William S. Kirkpatrick, Attorney General), for the commonwealth, appellant:
1. The act of May 6, 1887, P. L. 79, specifically taxes all estates, real, personal and mixed, situated in another state and passing to collaterals by will, when the person dying seised thereof was domiciled in this commonwealth at the time of his
Page 340
death. It is objected by the college that the title of this act, which is, "An act to provide for the better collection of collateral inheritance taxes," is defective, in not giving notice of an intention to impose the tax upon estates not within the terms of previous acts.
2. To this objection we reply that if it read simply, "An act to provide for the collection of collateral inheritance taxes," the title would undoubtedly be sufficient to comprehend all collateral inheritances, and that the insertion of the word "better" cannot impair what would be sufficient without it. And it is submitted that, even if we read the act in connection with previous legislation, the title gives notice of an intent not only to provide more effectual machinery for collection, but also a better definition of the subject matter of the tax.
3. It is, however, incorrect to read this statute in connection with previous legislation, as defining the subjects of taxation. The constitutionality of an act must be tested by what appears upon the face of it, independently of other legislation, and the same rule undoubtedly applies to the title. The title and subject matter of this act are properly connected, and the former fairly gives notice of the latter, the act embracing nothing not relating to or cognate with the subject matter stated in the title: Airy Street, 113 Pa. 281; Frederick v. Canal Co., 109 Pa. 50; Myers v. Commonwealth, 110 Pa. 217; Blood v. Mercelliott, 53 Pa. 391; Esling's App., 89 Pa. 210; Mauch Chunk v. McGee, 81 Pa. 433; Allegheny Co. Home's Case, 77 Pa. 77; Dorsey's App., 72 Pa. 192.
4. The tax in question is not a property tax, but a tax upon a civil right or privilege, to wit, the right to take property by inheritance or devise: Strode v. Commonwealth, 52 Pa. 181; Orcutt's App., 97 Pa. 179, 185; Scholey v. Rew, 23 Wall. 331; Eyre v. Jacob, 14 Gratt. 422 (73 Am. Dec. 367); Miller v. Commonwealth, 27 Gratt. 110; Commonwealth v. Herman, 16 W. N. 210. Hence the nature and situs of the property are immaterial, for the right, which is taxed, depends upon the laws of Pennsylvania. Her citizens, whether natural or artificial, are incompetent to enjoy the right to take in succession except under her laws, and this right may therefore be burdened by a tax.
5. The act of April 7, 1826, P. L. 146, differed from that of
Page 341
1887, in not including any express provision as to property lying outside the state. In Commonwealth v. Smith, 5 Pa. 142, the phrase "being within this commonwealth," in the former, was held to qualify the word "estate." The act of March 11, 1850, P. L. 170, subsequently construing these words as relating to persons, was held in Short's Est., 16 Pa. 63, to operate by way of addition, so that under the act of 1826, as thus construed, both person and estate must be...
To continue reading
Request your trial