State v. Silverthorne

• Decision Date: 19 December 1889
• Citation: 19 A. 124,52 N.J.L. 73
• Parties: STATE (TRUSTEES FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, Prosecutors) v. SILVERTHORNE, Collector.
• Court: New Jersey Supreme Court

19 A. 124

52 N.J.L. 73

STATE (TRUSTEES FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, Prosecutors)

v. SILVERTHORNE, Collector.

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Dec. 19, 1889.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Certiorari from tax assessment.

The following is the state of the case prepared by counsel: "William Mackey, of Oxford township, deceased, in and by his last will and testament, duly admitted to probate by the surrogate of Warren county, on July 20, 1882, provided as follows: 'I give and bequeath to the First Presbyterian Church of Oxford, Warren county, the sum of eighteen hundred dollars, to be secured by bond and mortgage, and the interest of fifteen hundred dollars of the same to be used towards the payment of the salary of the minister, and the interest of the remaining $300.00 to be used,' etc. During his life-time, he held a bond and mortgage for $1,500, against one A. Trimmer, on lands in Knowlton town ship. In the settlement of the estate of said deceased, the said bond and mortgage of $1,500 on lands of said Trimmer was by his executors duly assigned and turned over to the said trustees of said church as part of the said legacy and bequest, who became then and there the owners and holders of the said mortgage under the terms and conditions of said will, and who still hold the same, and apply the interest to the payment of the salary of the minister. In the year 1888, said A. Trimmer claimed a deduction for said mortgage to the assessor of Knowlton township, who allowed the deduction, and thereby assessed the said mortgage to' The Trustees of the First Presbyterian Church of Oxford,' the owners and holders of said mortgage. The said trustees refuse to pay the tax assessed on said mortgage."

Argued at June term, 1889, before MAGIE, GARRISON, and REED, JJ.

Wm. H. Morrow, for plaintiff. N. Harris, for defendant.

REED, J., (after stating the facts as above.) The question presented is whether the amount assessed is exempt upon the ground that it is an endowment or fund of a religious society. The statute relieves the latter kind of property from liability to be taxed. That the property mentioned in the state of the case is an endowment, seems to me to be too obvious for argument. A fund of money so settled that the income there from shall be a permanent aid in carrying on the work of a religious society is the most obvious instance of an "endowment," as such term is defined by lexicographers, and as the subject is known in the affairs of men. Such an arrangement is within the definition of an endowment formulated by Mr. Justice BEDLE in the case of State v. Lyon, 32 N. J. Law, 360.

As I understand the brief of the counsel for the defendant, his contention is that there are two features characterizing this fund, either of which strips it of the immunity which the statute confers upon the endowment. The first feature is that the testator, from whose will the gift arises, directed that the income from the amount bequeathed should be applied to the payment of the minister's salary. The second feature is that the testator directed that the principal should be secured by bond and mortgage, and that it follows that when so secured the property assumed a shape that...