Gilman v. the City of Sheboygan

CourtU.S. Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtSWAYNE.
CitationGilman v. the City of Sheboygan, 67 U.S. 510, 2 Black 510, 17 L.Ed. 305 (1862)
Decision Date01 December 1862
PartiesGILMAN v. THE CITY OF SHEBOYGAN

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Wisconsin.

Mr. Doolittle, of Wisconsin, for Appellant.

Mr. Howe, of Wisconsin, for Appellee.

Mr. Justice SWAYNE.

This is a suit in equity brought here by appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Wisconsin. The bill states as follows:

The complainant is the owner of a large amount of real estate in the City of Sheboygan, which is described in the bill.

On the 17th of January, 1854, the Legislature passed an act entitled 'an Act to authorize the City of Sheboygan to aid in the construction of a railroad.' This Act authorized the Commissioners named in it to borrow $100,000 upon the credit of the City to be invested in the capital stock of a Railroad Company, authorized to construct a railroad from the City of Sheboygan westwardly by way of Fon-du-lac to the Mississippi River, and to issue therefor the bonds of the City according to the provisions of the act.

The act further provided that the City should annually levy a tax upon all the taxable property of the City sufficient, in addition to the dividends upon the shares of its stock in the Company, to pay the interest upon the bonds.

The act also authorized the City Council to submit to the qualified voters of the City the question whether the further sum of $100,000 should be raised and invested in the same manner as the first $100,000.

By an act of the Legislature of the 28th of March, 1856, entitled, 'An Act to authorize the City of Sheboygan to aid in the construction of the Sheboygan and Mississippi Railroad,' the City Council was authorized to subscribe $50,000 to the capital stock of the Company, and to increase the amount of subscription from time to time until the aggregate should reach the sum of $100,000. The instalments upon the stock subscribed were to be paid by the levy of an annual tax upon all the real estate in the City—not exceeding $25,000 in any one year—until the whole amount of the subscriptions should be paid.

Under these Acts the City has made loans and issued its bonds therefor to the amount of $200,000.

The Legislature passed a subsequent Act, which is as follows:

'Section 1. All taxes hereafter levied by the Common Council of the City of Sheboygan for the (payment) of principal or interest of any bonds issued or to to issued by said City to aid in the construction of any railroad, plank road, or for any improvement of the harbor at the mouth of the Sheboygan River, shall be levied by said Council on the real estate of said City exclusively.

'Sec. 2. All acts or parts of acts that conflict with the provisions of this act are hereby repealed.

'Sec. 3. This act shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage.

'Approved March 7, 1857.'

In the year 1857, the City Council under the last named act, levied a tax upon all the real estate within the limits of the City of six cents upon each dollar of the valuation thereof 'for its harbor loans, railroad and plank road bonds,' 'and did not levy said sum or any part thereof upon any other kind of property within said City of Sheboygan for the said harbor loans, railroad and plank road bonds, but levied the tax for the payment of the interest upon those specific objects entirely and solely out of the real estate within said City limits; and that the real estate above stated and set forth in this complaint was included in and was taxed at the rate aforesaid, and for the purpose aforesaid.'

At the time this tax was levied, there was personal property in the city of Sheboygan to the amount of three or four hundred thousand dollars, liable to taxation, and upon which no tax was levied for either of said purposes for the year 1857. The Act of March 7th, 1857, and the tax levied under it, are alleged to be void. Defendant, Geele, is the Treasurer of said City, and as such authorized to execute deeds for land sold for taxes when the time for redemption expires. The defendants' property in the City has been sold for said tax and bought in by the City. Geele threatens to execute deeds to the City for the same. The time for redemption is about to expire.

The deeds, it is alleged, will cast a cloud upon complainant's title, embarrass him in disposing of the property, and render it less valuable to him. The prayer of the bill is, that the Treasurer be perpetually enjoined from executing, and the City from receiving, such deeds, and for general relief. The complainant subsequently filed an amended bill, in which it was claimed that the Act of 1857, and the tax levied under it, were void, because the Act of 1854 provided that a tax should be levied upon all the taxable property of the City for the payment of said bonds, that the bonds were issued and taken upon the faith of that act, and that its provisions constitute a contract with the bond holders, which the Act of 1857 seeks to violate.

The defendants demurred, and the Court sustained the demurrer.

Was there such a contract as is averred in the amended bill?

The Act of 1854 authorized the borrowing of money, the issuing of bonds, and the levying of a tax upon all the property in the City, for the purposes specified. The imposition, modification, and removal of taxes, and the exemption of property from such burdens, is an ordinary exercise of the power of State sovereignty. There is no pledge, express or implied, that this power should not thereafter be exercised.

Admitting that the State could enter into such an engagement, there is no evidence that it did. This fact should never be assumed unless the language used be too clear to admit of doubt. If the agreement existed, the complainant is not in a position to make the question. There is no allegation that the tax levied is insufficient. We hear of no complaint from the bondholders. They are not before us. It does not belong to the complainant, vicariously, to enforce their contract and protect their rights.

The objection, that these acts take private property for public purposes without compensation, and hence are within the prohibition of the State constitution upon that subject, is also without foundation. That clause of the Constitution refers solely to the exercise, by the State, of the right of eminent domain. The People vs. The Mayor of Brooklyn, (4 Coms., 419).

Is the Act of 1857 invalid, because it requires the tax in question to be levied exclusively upon the real estate of the city?

The provisions of the State Constitution, to which our attention has been called, as bearing upon the subject, are the following:

Art. VIII. 'Sec. 1.—The rule of taxation shall be uniform, and taxes shall be levied upon such property as the Legislature shall prescribe.'

Art. XI. 'Sec. 3.—It shall be the duty of the Legislature, and they are hereby required, to provide for the organization of cities and incorporated villages, and to restrict their power of taxation, assessment, borrowing money, contracting debts, and loaning their credit, so as to prevent abuses in assessments and taxation, and in contracting debts, by such municipal corporations.'

The Revised Statutes of Wisconsin, title 5, chap. 18, page 200, provide as follows:

'Sec. 1. All property, real and personal, within this State, not expressly exempted therefrom, shall be subject to taxation in the manner provided by law.'

'Sec. 4. The following property shall be exempt from taxation:

'All property, real and personal, of the United States and of this State. All public or corporate property of the several counties, cities, villages, towns and school districts in this State.' * * *

'All property exempt by law from execution, not exceeding in value $200.

'The personal property of all literary, benevolent, charitable and scientific institutions within this State, and such real estate as shall be actually occupied by them for the purposes for which they have been or shall be organized.'

'All houses of public worship, and the lots on which they are situate,' &c.

'All public libraries, and the real and personal property belonging to or connected with the same.

'The property of all Indians, who are not citizens, except the lands held by them by purchase.

'The personal property of persons, who, by reason of infirmity, age and poverty, may, in the opinion of the assessors, be unable to contribute towards the public charges.

'All property, real and personal, belonging to any agricultural society in this State.' * * *

No other property is exempted.

In Weeks vs. The City of Milwaukie, et al., (10 Wis. Rep., 242, Mr. Justice Payne, referring to 'the provision of Article II., Sec. 3, requiring ...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
44 cases
  • State v. Clement Nat. Bank
    • United States
    • Vermont Supreme Court
    • January 16, 1911
    ...v. Charleston, 96 U. S. 432, 24 L. Ed. 760; Cleveland, etc., R. R. Co. v. Pennsylvania, 15 Wall. 300, 21 L. Ed. 179; Gilman v. Sheboygan, 67 U. S. 510, 17 L. Ed. 305; North Missouri R. Co. v. Maguire, 20 Wall. 46, 22 L. Ed. 287. To impair the obligation of a contract, the statute must act u......
  • Chi., St. P., M. & O. Ry. Co. v. Douglas Cnty.
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Supreme Court
    • January 8, 1908
    ...distinctly manifested.” See, also, Rector, etc., v. County of Philadelphia, 24 How. (U. S.) 300, 16 L. Ed. 602;Gilman v. Sheboygan, 2 Black (U. S.) 510, 17 L. Ed. 305;Memphis Gas Co. v. Shelby Co., 109 U. S. 398, 3 Sup. Ct. 205, 27 L. Ed. 976;East Saginaw Mfg. Co. v. Saginaw, 19 Mich. 259, ......
  • Penna. R. Co. v. Duncan
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • November 11, 1889
    ...v. Billings, 4 Pet. 514; Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge, 11 Pet. 420; Christ Church v. Philadelphia, 24 How. 300; Gilman v. City of Sheboygan, 2 Black 510; Tucker v. Ferguson, 22 Wall. 527; Fertilizing Co. v. Hyde Park, 97 U. S. 659; Newton v. Commissioners, 100 U. S. 548, 561; 2 Har......
  • Village of Ridgefield Park v. Bergen County Bd. of Taxation
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court
    • April 12, 1960
    ...1941). The United States Supreme Court expressed itself as to the meaning of 'uniform rule' in the case of Gilman v. City of Sheboygan, 67 U.S. (2 Black) 510, 517, 17 L.Ed. 305 (1862). In that case the court 'The court refer with approbation to the Exchange Bank of Columbus v. Hines, 3 O.St......
  • Get Started for Free