First Nat'l Bank of Hannibal v. Meredith

• Decision Date: 31 October 1869
• Parties: THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF HANNIBAL, Respondent, v. JOHN D. MEREDITH, Collector, Appellant.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

44 Mo. 500

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF HANNIBAL, Respondent,

v.JOHN D. MEREDITH, Collector, Appellant.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

October Term, 1869.

Appeal from Sixth District Court.

W. M. Boulware, for appellant.

I. The collector had the right under State authority to tax the shares of stock owned in this corporation. (Lionberger v. Rowse, 43 Mo. 67.)

II. An injunction will not lie to restrain the sale of personal property for taxes. (Sayre v. Tompkins, 23 Mo. 443; Deane v. Todd, 22 Mo. 90; Lockwood et al. v. St. Louis, 24 Mo. 20; State v. P. G. R. R.R. Co., 32 Mo. 496.)

III. Injunction does not lie in this case. If the assessment is void, the collector who levies upon personal property under it is a trespasser ab initio, and responsible on his official bond. (State to use Hann. & St. Jo. R.R. v. Shacklett, 37 Mo. 280, and cases cited.) If not void, but merely irregular, respondent was provided by law with an easy and summary remedy, and there was no ground for equitable interposition. (See Missouri cases above cited; Mintern v. Hays, 2 Cal. 590; Wilson v. Mayor, etc., 4 E. P. Smith, 675; Robinson v. Gaar, 6 Cal. 273; Insurance Co. v. New York, 33 Barb. 322; Munson v. Minor, 22 Ill. 303; Chicago v. Frary, id. 34; Van Rensalaer v. Kidd, 4 Barb. 17; Livingston v. Hollenbeck, id. 9; Dodd v. Hartford, 25 Conn. 232; Green v. Mumford, 5 R. I. 478; Mechanics, etc., v. De Bolt, 1 Ohio, 591; Hughes v. Kline, 30 Penn. 227; Methodist, etc., v. Mayor, etc., 2 Md. Ch. Decis. 78.)

IV. If an injunction will lie to restrain the sale of these shares, it will not lie at the evil of the bank.

Green & Wilson, for respondent.

I. Shares of national bank stock can only be taxed by State authority in strict conformity with the act of Congress of June, 1864. (Van Allen v. The Assessors, 3 Wall. 573-581; Bradley et al. v. The People of Illinois, 4 Wall. 459; The People ex rel. Duer v. The Tax Commissioner of New York City, 4 Wall. 244; Wright, auditor, etc. v. Stilz, 6 Am. Law Reg., N. S., 471-5; Frazer v. Siebern et al., 16 Ohio, 614; 6 Am. Law Reg., N. S., 475-93; Markoe et al. v. Hartranft et al., Id. 487-93; Hubbard et al. v. Supervisors of Johnson County; Davenport National Bank v. The County of Scott et al.; National Bank of Oskaloosa v. Young,--Iowa,--.)

II. The State revenue act of 1863, requiring banking corporations to pay the taxes assessed on the shares of individual stockholders, does not conform in the mode of taxation with the requirements of the national bank act of June 3, 1864, and as to the shares of national bank stock is therefore inoperative and void. (3 Wall. 573-586; St. Louis Building and Savings Association v. Lightner, 42 Mo. 421; Lionberger v. Rowse 43 Mo. 67; Markoe et al. v. Hartranft et al., 6 Am. Law Reg., N. S., 489-93.)

III. The petition states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The court in this case had authority to grant an injunction. (1 Sto. Eq. Jur. §§ 32, 33, 64, 76.)

BLISS, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

The Hannibal Court of Common Pleas allowed an injunction against defendant as tax collector for Marion county, to restrain him from the collection of taxes upon the bank shares illegally assessed against the bank. The petition sets forth the organization of the bank, under the law of Congress of June 3, 1864, with a capital of $100,000, and the names of the shareholders, showing that some of them resided in said Marion county, some of them in the State outside of the county, and that some were non-residents of the State, and averring that they were not liable to be taxed upon their shares except according to the act of Congress. The petition sets out the statutes of Missouri, in relation to the collection of taxes from banks, as contained in the revision of 1865, and avers that, in accordance with these provisions, the taxes of all the shareholders, for their stock, were assessed by said collector against the bank, and, in default of payment, that he seized and advertised for sale, to satisfy the same, the whole one thousand shares, comprising its capital stock. The petition charges that the shares are not taxable by law, and that their seizure is unlawful, and avers that their sale will greatly damage the bank by impairing its credit and stability, and injure the owners of the stock by casting a cloud over its title and destroying its convertibility, for which the law furnishes no remedy unaided by equity. The petition also claims that neither the plaintiff or its stockholders are liable to taxation, except at the rate of one per cent. upon its capital, in accordance with the assessment upon certain of the old banks of the State; and, after claiming other irreparable damage from the threatened action of defendant, asks for an injunction. A preliminary injunction was allowed, and, upon appearance and demurrer to the petition, it was made perpetual. The action of the Court of Common Pleas was affirmed in the District Court, and defendant appeals.

Two questions are raised by this record: first, the liability of the plaintiff to pay the taxes charged to its stockholders; and second, if not liable, its right to equitable relief. The first of these questions has been fully considered and decided by this court since this petition was filed, in Lionberger v. Rowse, 43 Mo. 67. The action complained of was not the same as in the case at bar, but the collector sought to collect the tax assessed upon the plaintiff's shares in a national bank, of the plaintiff himself, and not of the bank,...