In re Consol. Elec. Storage Co.

• Decision Date: 11 July 1893
• Citation: 26 A. 983
• Parties: In re CONSOLIDATED ELECTRIC STORAGE CO.
• Court: New Jersey Court of Chancery

26 A. 983

In re CONSOLIDATED ELECTRIC STORAGE CO.

Court of Chancery of New Jersey.

July 11, 1893.

Petition by the state, at the relation of the attorney general, to restrain the Consolidated Electric Storage Company from exercising its corporate franchises without payment of certain taxes. Petition dismissed.

W. Y. Johnson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Henry Weston, for defendant.

BIRD, V. C. Since the case of In re Electro-Pneumatic Transit Co., (N. J. Ch.) 26 Atl. Rep. 463, it seems to me quite plain that the questions involved in this controversy should have been determined in a court of law. 1 came to the conclusion, upon a careful consideration of the law, in that case, that the only province of this court, in issuing an injunction, is to act in aid of the courts of law. The court of law first settles and determines the rights of the parties, fixes the amount that each company is liable to be assessed for, and proceeds to execute the judgment rendered, in every case; and in cases of a failure to make the tax by the ordinary process, in such cases, then the aid of this court may be invoked by injunction. It is my conclusion that this court has no other or further jurisdiction. But, upon the opening of this case before me, 1 understood that these conclusions were admitted, but that neither side would raise the question of jurisdiction.

That the defendant in this case is a manufacturing company, admits of no dispute; but it is seriously questioned whether or not, under all the circumstances of the case, it comes within the purview of the supplement of the act of April 18, 1884, which supplement was passed March 16, 1891. Previous to the passage of the supplement, it was subjected to a tax of one-tenth of 1 percent. upon the whole amount of its capital stock, unless it was actually engaged in the business of manufacturing in this state. The supplement provides that, in case such manufacturing company has 50 per cent. of its capital stock employed in the business of manufacturing, then it shall be exempt from such taxation. That this company has 50 per cent. of its capital stock employed in its business in this state is admitted; the insistment being that the whole amount of 50 per cent. is not in reality employed in the business of manufacturing, within the true meaning of the supplement. Among other things, the certificate filed by the company, with the view of becoming organized, shows that its object was not only "the manufacturing, dealing in, furnishing, and supplying of electricity, light, heat, and power, and the manufacturing, using, and selling, and leasing and licensing to others the right to manufacture, use, and sell, electrical accumulators or storage batteries, electric motors, gearing, regulators, and dynamos, switches, lamps, electrical devices for lighting, heating, and power, and all electrical machinery and...