State v. First Nat. Bank
Decision Date | 23 December 1903 |
Citation | 180 Mo. 717,79 S.W. 943 |
Parties | STATE ex rel. WILSON, Revenue Collector, v. FIRST NAT. BANK OF CARTERVILLE. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
In Banc. Appeal from Circuit Court, Jasper County; J. D. Perkins, Judge.
Action by the state, on relation of Robert A. Wilson, as collector of revenue of Jasper county, against the First National Bank of Carterville. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed.
Howard Gray, for appellant. E. L. Shepherd, E. O. Brown, and Geo. W. Crowder, for respondent.
Plaintiff, as collector of the revenue of Jasper county, began this suit against defendant, the First National Bank of Carterville, Mo., a banking institution organized under the laws of the United States, to collect certain personal taxes, amounting in the aggregate to $2,563, claimed to be due from the bank to the county and state for the years 1897, 1898, 1899, 1900, and 1901, on account of assessments for those years against the shares of stock issued by defendant bank. The following is a copy of the tax bill upon which the suit is predicated:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PERSONAL TAX BILL State of Missouri, County of Jasper — ss I, Robt. A. Wilson, collector of the revenue within and for the county of Jasper, in the state of Missouri do hereby certify that the following amounts of personal taxes remain delinquent in favor of the several funds for the several years on personal property in said county and state, set opposite thereto, to wit ======================================================================================================== | | | Yrs. for | | | | Spl. | Min. | | | | Which | School | State | County | Brdg. | Twp. | Total Name | Township | Valuation | Taxes | Tax | Tax | Rev. | Tax | R. R. | Tax | | | are Due | | | | | Tax | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- First National | Carterville | 25200 | 1901 | 327.60 | 63.00 | 126.00 | 37.80 | 25.20 | 579.60 Bank | | 23606 | 1900 | 306.68 | 59.02 | 118.03 | | 23.61 | 507.54 of Carterville | | 23463 | 1899 | 287.56 | 58.66 | 117.32 | | 23.46 | 481.00 | | 21875 | 1898 | 196.84 | 54.88 | 109.35 | | 21.87 | 382.74 | | 18179 | 1897 | 245.41 | 45.45 | 90.89 | | 18.18 | 399.93 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand at the city of Carthage, in said county and state, this third day of March, 1902. Robert Wilson Collector of the Revenue within and for the County of Jasper and State of Missouri. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the trial, judgment was rendered for all the taxes sued for, included in the tax bill above set out (except that assessed for the year 1897), to reverse which defendant has brought the case to this court on appeal.
Appellant's first contention is that nothing was shown, either by the tax bill, the taxbooks, or the assessment lists offered in evidence, to indicate that any assessment had ever been made or attempted against the shares of stock of the defendant bank, as alleged in plaintiff's petition, but that, on the contrary, the taxbooks show the assessments were against the capital stock of the bank; and, further, that if the assessments, as made, be held and treated as assessments against the shares of stock of the corporation bank, still no warrant is found in the statute to justify such assessments of said shares of stock in solido to the bank, as plaintiff claims was done in this case; and, as its final contention, appellant says that if the court should be of the opinion that since the act of 1895, the statute did authorize the assessment of the shares of stock of national banks to be made direct against the banks in solido, and not against the individual shareholder, that then the statute is in violation of the restriction of section 5219 of the federal statutes designating how shares of stock of national banks may be assessed by state authority wherever such bank engages in business, and for that reason the taxes in this case cannot be sustained. Respondent, upon the other hand, while recognizing that the rule in this state prior to 1895 was, as is contended for by appellant, that all taxes against the shares of stock of national banks and all corporate banking institutions doing business in this state were assessable against the individual owners of the stock, and not against the bank itself, contends that since the amendment of 1895, now section 9153, Rev. St. 1899, the rule is otherwise, and that the shares of stock of corporate banking institutions doing business in this state are properly assessed in solido to the bank direct, as was done by the assessor in this case; and, further, that such assessment and levy of taxes do not violate the provisions of the federal statutes authorizing the taxation of shares of stock of national banks by state authority.
Respondent's chief reliance, as we understand his effort to sustain the assessment of the shares of stock of defendant bank in solido direct to the bank, as in the present instance, is made to depend upon the fact that by the amendment of 1895, supra, there has been left out or omitted, in the body of the act, the following words, "and the names of the persons who hold the same," found in the law prior to its amendment, prescribing the duties of the president or other chief officer in preparing their statements for the assessors; and that all the assessments involved in this case have been made since the act of 1895 went into effect.
The act of 1891, amended by the act of 1895, provides as follows: Approved April 1, 1891. Acts 1891, p. 195.
The amendment of 1895 reads: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State ex rel. Hagerman v. St. Louis & East St. Louis Electric Railway Co.
...by defendant. R. S. 1899, sec. 9303; State ex rel. v. Railroad, 135 Mo. 618; State ex rel. v. Cunningham, 153 Mo. 642; State ex rel. v. Bank of Cartersville, 180 Mo. 717; Union Transit Co. v. Kentucky, 199 U.S. 194, Louisville, Ferry Co. v. Kentucky, 188 U.S. 385, 396; Mahan v. Meredith Ban......
-
State ex rel. to Use of Bay v. Citizens State Bank
...the stock, and not against the corporation or the property which the shares represents. State ex rel. v. Catron, 118 Mo. 280; State ex rel. v. Bank, 180 Mo. 717; State rel. v. Shryack, 179 Mo. 424; State ex rel. v. Bank, 160 Mo. 640. The shares of stock are personal property of the stockhol......
-
The State ex rel. Campbell v. Brinkop
...87 Mo. 441; State ex rel. v. Catron, 118 Mo. 280; State ex rel. v. Bank, 160 Mo. 640; State ex rel. v. Shryack, 179 Mo. 424; State ex rel. v. Bank, 180 Mo. 717; State ex rel. v. Bank, 196 Mo. 516. (2) determining the value of the shares there must be considered all the property of the corpo......
-
State ex rel. and to Use of Wyatt v. Cantley
...ex rel. v. St. Louis County, 84 Mo. 234; City of Jefferson v. Mock, 74 Mo. 61; State ex rel. v. Railroad, 114 Mo. 7; State ex rel. v. Bank of Carterville, 180 Mo. 717; Sec. 12775, R. S. 1919; Lionberger v. Rowse, 43 67; First Natl. Bank v. Meredith, 44 Mo. 500; Springfield v. Natl. Bank, 87......