The Presbyterian Theological Seminary of The Nw. v. People Ex Rel. W. T. Johnson

• Decision Date: 31 March 1882
• Citation: 101 Ill. 578,1881 WL 10715
• Parties: THE PRESBYTERIAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY OF THE NORTHWESTv.THE PEOPLE ex rel. W. T. Johnson, Collector.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

101 Ill. 578

1881 WL 10715 (Ill.)

THE PRESBYTERIAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY OF THE NORTHWEST

v.THE PEOPLE ex rel. W. T. Johnson, Collector.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Filed at Ottawa Nov. 10, 1881.Rehearing denied March Term, 1882.

APPEAL from the County Court of Cook county; the Hon. MASON B. LOOMIS, Judge, presiding.

Mr. WM. C. GOUDY, for the appellant, contended that the five acres which is taxed was real estate on which an institution of learning is located, within the meaning of the statute, and consequently exempt from taxation. The division of it from the other land does not change its character. The exemption is of all the property of an institution of learning, and not merely of the real estate on which the institution is located.

It is clear that if the clause, viz: “including the real estate on which the institutions are located,” was not in the statute, all the property, real and personal, of this appellant, “not leased or otherwise used with a view to profit,” would, beyond any question, be exempt from taxation, for the word ““property,” in tax exemptions, includes everything capable of ownership. Primm v. Belleville, 59 Ill. 142; Home for Friendless v. Rouse, 8 Wall. 430; Washington University v. Rouse, 8 Id. 438; Atwater v. Woodbridge, 6 Conn. 223.

Where a law is plain and unambiguous, whether it be expressed in general or limited terms, the legislature should be intended to mean what they have plainly expressed, and consequently no room is left for construction. Arrington v. Smith, 28 Wis. 43; Tynan v. Walker, 35 Cal. 634; Warfield v. Fox,53 Pa. St. 382; Encking v. Simmons, 28 Wis. 272.

Applying the principles of these cited cases to the case at bar, it is evident that there is no express limitation to limit the general words here used, and a limitation can not be implied. The fact that by sub-section 2 of the exemption section of the Revenue act, church property only is exempt when actually used for public worship, is no argument against this appellant's view.

Mr. CONSIDER H. WILLETT, for the appellee:

The claim of appellant that “all property,” meaning all real estate of any theological seminary, no matter where located in the State, is exempt from taxation, has no support in the language of the statute creating the exemption.

Let us examine this exemption, “all property described in this section, to the extent herein limited.” First, “all lands donated by the United States for school purposes not sold or leased.” The exemption rests upon “all lands donated by the United States for school purposes” until sold or leased, at which time or event the exemption is destroyed. “All public school houses.” “All property of institutions of learning * * * not leased by such institutions or otherwise used with a view to profit.”“Including the real estate on which the institutions are located,” means that all real estate shall be taxed except that upon which the institution is located. Exemption is the exception, and taxation is the rule. First Methodist Episcopal Church v. Chicago, 26 Ill. 482; People v. Western Seamen's Friend Society, 87 Id. 246; Washington College v. Com. of Shawnee County, 8 Kan. 344.

Where exemptions are claimed they must be clear and unequivocal, and all doubts are to be solved in favor of the State and against the exemption. The intention of the State to bind itself by an exemption must be clear, as all presumptions are against it. Cooley on Taxation, 54.

In Academy of Fine Arts v. Philadelphia,22 Pa. St. 496, it was held that an exemption of universities, colleges, academies and school houses did not extend to an academy of fine arts, “as none can claim an exemption unless the exemption be so clearly expressed in the statute as to admit of no other construction.”

In Crawford v. Burrell,53 Pa. St. 219, it is said: “Taxation is an act of sovereignty, to be performed, so far as it conveniently can, with justice and equity to all. Exemptions, no matter how meritorious, are of grace, and must be strictly construed.”

An exemption from all taxation in the charters of churches and schools will not exempt them from assessments for local improvements. Cooley on Taxation, 147.

Mr. JUSTICE SCOTT delivered the opinion of the Court:

This was an application by the county collector of Cook county for judgment against lands and lots for unpaid taxes for the year 1880, and prior years. Among other lands against which judgment was sought was a tract of land, consisting of five acres, belonging to the Presbyterian Theological Seminary of the Northwest....