United States v. Philadelphia Co
| Decision Date | 07 November 1887 |
| Citation | 123 U.S. 113,31 L.Ed. 138,8 S.Ct. 77 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES v. PHILADELPHIA & R. R. CO |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Sol. Gen. Jenks, for plaintiff in error.
Wm. Ward, Thos. Hart, Jr., and Geo. R. Kaercher, for defendants in error.
Trial by jury in the courts of the United States is a trial presided over by a judge, with authority, not only to rule upon objections to evidence, and to instruct the jury upon the law, but also, when in his judgment the due administration of justice requires it, to aid the jury by explaining and commenting upon the testimony, and even giving them his opinion upon questions of fact, provided only he submits those questions to their determination. Railroad v. Putnam, 118 U. S. 545, 7 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1; Railway v. Vickers, 122 U. S. 360, 7 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1216. The judge who presided at the trial of this action did not exceed his rightful power in this respect.
The action was brought by the United States against a railroad corporation to recover $40,844,19, for unpaid taxes on undivided profits from June 30, 1864, to November 30, 1867; under the internal revenue act of June 30, 1864, c. 173, § 122, as amended by the act of July 13, 1866, c. 184. 13 St. 284; 14 St. 138. The trial proceeded upon the rule established by previous decisions of this court, that an assessment is not required by the act, nor, if made, conclusive upon either party, and that in an action to recover the tax the controlling question is not what has been assessed, but what is by law due. Bank v. U. S., 19 Wall. 227; Clinkenbeard v. U. S., 21 Wall. 65.
The president of the corporation testified that in 1868 United States made a demand upon the company for some $350,000 alleged to be due for such taxes for the same period; that the company resisted the demand, and through him as its counsel contended that it had already paid more than was due, and was entitled to a considerable credit for items really belonging to construction, though charged to income in the form in which its accounts were made up; that the company opened all its books to the officers of the government, and after full investigation by them, and arguments in behalf of both parties before the assessor of internal revenue for the district, occupying several weeks, the officers of the company and the assessor agreed upon a settlement and adjustment of the demand for the sum of $39,797.61, which the company thereupon paid, and for which it took the following receipt:
'May, 1868, being amount assessed of June list for July 1, 1864, to November 30, 1867.
JOSEPH G. KLINE, Deputy-Collector.'
The only witness called by the United States was an internal revenue agent, who testified that in November, 1879, he examined the defendant's books and accounts, the defendant giving him every facility that he desired; and that the result of his examination showed that the gross amount of the tax for the period in question was $85,532.60, and that, deducting an overpayment of $4,890.80 in 1869 on the 'renewalfund,' (which the commissioner of internal revenue had since held not to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Clement Nat. Bank
...229, 25 L. Ed. 373; United States v. Erie Railway Co., 107 U. S. 1, 2 Sup. Ct. 83, 27 L. Ed. 385; United. States v. Philadelphia & Reading R. Co., 123 U. S. 113, 8 Sup. Ct. 77, 31 L. Ed. 138. It is evident from these cases that there are some classes of property as to which a legislative as......
-
Jelke v. United States
... ... there is corroborative evidence in the case.' ... This ... was not error. Simmons v. United States, 142 U.S ... 148, 155, 12 Sup.Ct. 171, 35 L.Ed. 968; Vicksburg & ... Railroad Co. v. Putnam, 118 U.S. 545, 7 Sup.Ct. 1, 30 ... L.Ed. 257; United States v. Philadelphia & Reading ... R.R., 123 U.S. 113, 8 Sup.Ct. 77, 31 L.Ed. 138 ... In ... fact, upon all of the evidence in this case it would not have ... been error for the court to charge the jury as a matter of ... law that there was corroborative evidence supporting the ... alleged declarations ... ...
-
United States v. Sobell
...is a trial not simply by a jury but by a jury acting under the instructions of a judge. United States v. Philadelphia & Reading R. R., 123 U.S. 113, 114, 8 S.Ct. 77, 31 L.Ed. 138 (1887). But the guarantee is also of instructions to the jury by a judge who is assisted by appropriate requests......
-
United States v. England
...75 (1851); Vicksburg, etc. Railroad Co. v. Putnam, 118 U.S. 545, 7 S.Ct. 1, 30 L.Ed. 257 (1886); United States v. Philadelphia & Reading Railroad, 123 U.S. 113, 8 S.Ct. 77, 31 L.Ed. 138 (1887); Lovejoy v. United States, 128 U.S. 171, 9 S.Ct. 57, 32 L.Ed. 389 (1888); Simmons v. United States......