Title Guarantee Loan & Trust Co. v. Hamilton, 6 Div. 599.

Citation193 So. 107,238 Ala. 602
Decision Date11 January 1940
Docket Number6 Div. 599.
PartiesTITLE GUARANTEE LOAN & TRUST CO. v. HAMILTON, TAX COLLECTOR.
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; E. M. Creel, Judge.

Bill by the Title Guarantee Loan & Trust Company against J. W Hamilton, as tax collector of Jefferson county, for a declaratory judgment determining that certain personal property of complainant is not subject to ad valorem tax. From a decree sustaining a demurrer to the bill, complainant appeals.

Affirmed.

Smyer Smyer & Bainbridge, of Birmingham, for appellant.

Mullins & Deramus, of Birmingham, for appellee.

Thos S. Lawson, Atty. Gen., and John W. Lapsley and J. Edw Thornton, Asst. Attys. Gen., amici curiae, in behalf of the State.

GARDNER Justice.

Upon the merits, the question is whether or not the tangible personal property of appellant, such as office furniture, equipment and abstract books, is exempt from ad valorem taxation.

In Article XII, Chapter I (General Acts 1935, page 428), treating the matter of excise tax for financial institutions, is section 346.6 (page 433), exempting from ad valorem taxation "all moneyed capital employed in the business the privilege of engaging in which is hereby taxed."

Reduced to the last analysis, the argument is that the tangible personal property comes within the meaning of the words "moneyed capital," as used in said section. It may be well to here note that appellant, seeking an exemption from taxation, assumes the burden to clearly establish the right. In all cases of doubt as to legislative intention, the presumption is in favor of the taxing power. 61 Corpus Juris 391; Anniston City Land Co. v. State, 160 Ala. 253, 48 So. 659; State v. Praetorians, 226 Ala. 259, 146 So. 411.

For the appellant, the best that can be said is that the language is ambiguous, and the text of 12 Corpus Juris Secundum, Capital, p. 1124, to the effect that the phrase "moneyed capital," as used in a particular connection, has a more limited meaning than the term "personal property," is well sustained by the authorities. First National Bank v. City of Richmond, C.C., 39 F. 309; Mercantile National Bank v. City of New York, C.C., 28 F. 776; First National Bank v. Anderson, 269 U.S. 341, 46 S.Ct. 135, 70 L.Ed. 295; Commercial National Bank v. Chambers, 182 U.S. 556, 21 S.Ct. 863, 45 L.Ed. 1227; Ward v. First National Bank, 225 Ala. 10, 142 So. 93.

A reading of these cases, we think, is persuasive that these words as used in the taxing statute here considered are properly to be given their restricted meaning.

Appellant lays some stress upon the language of section 5219, R.S., in 12 U.S.C.A. § 548, where congressional authority for state taxation of national banks is found, and the decision of the Court of Appeals in Tarrant v. Bessemer National Bank, 7 Ala.App. 285, 61...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • Dept. of Revenue v. Nat. Peanut Festival Assoc.
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • November 7, 2008
    ...In all cases of doubt as to legislative intention, the presumption is in favor of the taxing power. Title Guarantee Loan and Trust Co. v. Hamilton, 238 Ala. 602, 193 So. 107, 108 [1940]; Curry v. Reeves, 240 Ala. 14, 15, 195 So. 428, 430 [ (1940) ].' "Brundidge Milling Co. v. State, 45 Ala.......
  • EX PARTE EMERALD MOUNTAIN EXPRESSWAY BRIDGE
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • March 14, 2003
    ...all cases of doubt as to legislative intention, the presumption is in favor of the taxing power. Title Guarantee Loan and Trust Co. v. Hamilton, 238 Ala. 602, [604,] 193 So. 107, 108 [1940]; Curry v. Reeves, 240 Ala. 14, 15, 195 So. 428, 430 Flav-O-Rich, Inc. v. City of Birmingham, 476 So.2......
  • State v. Calumet & Hecla Consol. Copper Co., 8 Div. 583
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • June 30, 1953
    ...that exemptions from taxation are strictly construed against the taxpayer and in favor of the state. Title Guarantee Loan & Trust Co. v. Hamilton, 238 Ala. 602, 193 So. 107; State v. Praetorians, 226 Ala. 259, 146 So. The state contends that the words 'for sale' should be read into this exe......
  • Eagerton v. Terra Resources, Inc.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • December 10, 1982
    ......3 Prior to this act, the title of § 40-20-2 was "Levy and amount of tax upon ...) previously found in § 40-20-2 to six percent (6%). One of the exemptions mentioned in the title ... State, 406 So.2d 890 (Ala.1981); Title Guarantee Loan & Trust Co. v. Hamilton, 238 Ala. 602, 193 ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT