Des Moines Nat. Bank v. Fairweather
Decision Date | 12 February 1921 |
Docket Number | 33525 |
Citation | 181 N.W. 459,191 Iowa 1240 |
Parties | DES MOINES NATIONAL BANK, Appellee, v. THOMAS FAIRWEATHER et al., Appellants |
Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION ON REHEARING SEPTEMBER 28, 1921.
Appeal from Polk District Court.--THOMAS J. GUTHRIE, Judge.
IN THE district court, this was an appeal from the action of the city council of Des Moines, acting as the board of review, in the matter of an assessment of the shares of stock of the plaintiff bank. The appeal was presented to the district court in the form of a petition filed by the plaintiff, to which petition the defendants demurred. The district court overruled the demurrer. The defendants, electing to stand thereon, have appealed to this court.
Reversed.
H. W Byers, Reson S. Jones, C. A. Weaver, and Paul Hewitt, for appellants.
Sargent Gamble & Read, for appellee.
Pursuant to Section 1322, Code Supplement, 1913, the bank furnished to the assessor the statement required by such section for the purpose of enabling the assessor to fix the assessed value of the bank shares of stock, and to assess the same against the respective stockholders. From this statement it appeared that the capital stock, the surplus, and the undivided earnings amounted to an aggregate of $ 905,849. This aggregate included real estate to the value of $ 156,000, and another item of $ 62,000, both of which items were deducted by the board of review from the larger aggregate, leaving a net valuation, for the purpose of assessment of the shares of stock, of $ 687,799.
It appeared also from such statement that the plaintiff held as an investment certain tax-exempt securities of the United States government, amounting to $ 1,442,486. The plaintiff demanded that the valuation of its shares for the purpose of assessment should be diminished by the amount of such tax-exempt securities. This contention was denied by the board of review and allowed by the ruling of the district court. The effect of such allowance was to absorb the entire value of the plaintiff's shares of stock for the purpose of taxation, and to leave no assessable value therein. Such result is sufficiently startling to challenge both judicial and legislative attention.
In its petition in the district court, the plaintiff set forth the following seven grounds of attack upon the assessment:
Defendants' demurrer was based upon two general grounds:
(1) That it appeared upon the face of the petition that the plaintiff was not entitled to any relief.
(2) That Chapter 257 of the Acts of the Thirty-eighth General Assembly is unconstitutional and void.
These stated grounds of the petition and demurrer concisely present the scope of the whole controversy.
The demurrer was overruled generally, so that the plaintiff stands here upon all the grounds of its petition, any one of which, if valid, is sufficient to sustain the ruling below. As to the first six grounds of plaintiff's petition, they go to the power of taxation conferred upon the state by Section 5219 of the Revised Statutes of the United States. The seventh ground goes to the construction and validity of the statutes of this state, Chapter 257, Acts of the Thirty-eighth General Assembly.
I. As to the first six grounds of complaint made by plaintiff against the assessment, these all involve the question of the power of the state, under the permission of Section 5219 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, to assess against the shareholders of a national bank the value of the shares of stock therein in accord with the provisions of our Section 1322, and regardless of the tax-exempt character of the assets of the bank. We have ourselves held in the affirmative on this question. Head v. Board of Review, 170 Iowa 300; First Nat. Bank v. City of Council Bluffs, 182 Iowa 107, 161 N.W. 706. Such also is the holding of the Federal courts, whose precedents are obligatory upon us upon this question. See Hannan v. First Nat. Bank, 269 F. 527. The cited case was decided very recently by the Federal circuit court of appeals for this circuit. It reviews the previous cases with great care, and holds squarely that there is no conflict between Section 5219 of the Revised Statutes of the United States and Section 1322 of the Code of Iowa.
In view of this pronouncement, it is quite needless that we enter into argument on this feature of the case. Following the Federal holding in the Hannan case, we must hold that the first six grounds of complaint set forth in plaintiff's petition must each and all be overruled.
II. It remains to consider the seventh ground of the petition and the demurrer thereto. Chapter 257 of the Acts of the Thirty-eighth General Assembly is a purported amendment to Section 1304 of the Supplemental Supplement of 1915. Such act, with the title thereto, is in full as follows:
We find great difficulty in applying this statute to its purported subject-matter. It purports to be a proviso amendment to the first sixteen lines of Section 1304, Supplemental Supplement, 1915. The first sixteen lines of such section constitute Subsection 1 thereof, which is as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial