Case ID: monaghan_1/html/0344-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Bradford County’s Appeal. [Finan v. Bradford Co.]
    A portable steam, satv mill, situate upon the land of another, the owner of the mill paying an annual sum to the owner of the land for the privilege, is not taxable as real estate under the Act of April 15,1834, which provides for the assessment of “real estate, viz.: all houses, lands . . . mills and manufactories of all descriptions.”
    
      March 21, 1889.
    Appeal, No. 55, July T. 1888, from a decree -of CLP. Bradford Co., on a case stated, in the nature of a bill in -equity, between James Finan, as complainant, and Bradford County ¡and Albany Township as defendants, at Feb. T. 1888, No. 2. .McCollum and Mitchell, JJ., absent.
    The case stated was as follows:
    “ The following facts are hereby agreed upon, as in the nature ¡of a case stated, in the form of a bill in equity, praying for an injunction to restrain the above-named defendants from the collection of certain taxes assessed and levied upon and on account of a certain detached portable steam sawmill belonging to the above named plaintiff:
    “I. James Finan, the above-named plaintiff, resides in the •township of Overton, Bradford county, Pa., and is the owner of ■a certain detached portable steam sawmill. He has no lumber of his own to saw, and said mill never has been set upon plaintiff’s own land. In the latter part of 1885 he" purchased said mill and set it up and used it in Terry township, Bradford county, Pa., till the ¡spring of 1886, when he moved it into Albany township, where it now is. It appears to have been assessed in Terry township for the year 1886 as real estate, a “ Steam S. Mill,” and valued at $840. Plaintiff had no knowledge of said assessment prior to its removal into Albany township, and never was called upon for any taxes thereon. The same mill is now assessed in Albany township, Brad-Lord county, Pa., as real estate, “ Steam Mill,” and valued at $840.
    “ II. On the day of appeals for Albany township aforesaid, plaintiff, with his counsel, James Wood, appeared before the commissioners of Bradford county at their office in Towanda borough, •and objected to the valuation set upon said mill by the assessor, and ¡also objected to any assessment whatsoever, upon the ground that ■said mill is not real estate, nor assessable, nor taxable by virtue of ¡any law of the state of Pennsylvania. No decision was reached on that day, and plaintiff and his counsel left with the understanding that the case was to have further consideration.
    “ III. The fair, assessable value of said mill is $400, as compared with other mills of like nature that have been assessed. For two years past, mills of like character have been assessed and the taxes paid thereon by their owner in said county.
    “ IY. The said mill consists of a flue boiler and fire-box 16 feet long by about 3 feet in diameter, and smoke-stack 40 feet high, steam engine,' line shaft or spindle, with belt and balance wheels, circular and cut-off and edging saws with frames for each, carriage bed, carriage and bull wheel. All of the saw and wheel frames, as well as carriage and carriage bed, are painted.
    “Y. The said mill was purchased under an order for a * Detached Portable Steam Mill,’ and bears that name.
    “ YI. The said mill is set up as follows, to wit: The boiler, fire-box and smoke-stack are outside of the frame which shelters the engine and its fixtures and attachments, and rests upon iron legs or supports, fastened to two wooden bed pieces by notches and wooden keys or wedges. The engine is firmly fastened to a log 11 feet long and about 16 inches square, which is carried with the mill wherever it goes, and is called ‘ the engine bed.’ This 'bed piece is fastened by wooden keys or wedges to two logs leveled and firmly supported by earth and stones. The engine and its fixtures and machinery, run thereby, are sheltered by a structure substantially as follows r A number of large logs sawed off from 1 to 9 feet in length are set-upon end, supported by stones or timbers, and upon them are placed three heavy stringers about 50 feet in length each, and this foundation is braced by planks spiked across the sides and ends. Upon-these stringers rest 14 cross-beams, 24 feet long each, and in them, notches are cut, and the carriage bed and saw frames are dropped in and fastened with wooden keys or wedges ; so that the entire machinery mentioned in paragraph IY. of this bill can be loosened, detached and made ready for removal by removing the keys and wedges aforesaid. The frame that covers the engine and fixtures attached and run thereby is about 24 x 50 feet in size, and is built of timbers about 6x8 inches in diameter, braced top and bottom— braces toe nailed. There is not a mortise in the entire frame. The-roof is double-boarded. On the north side, and on the outside of this frame, is a small board-building about 12 x 14 feet, with double-board roof, in which sits a run of stones used for grinding chop-when the sawmill is in operation. The small line shaft or spindle, with its belt wheels thereon, is supported by wooden braces or brackets spiked to the foundation or basement timbers.
    “ YII. This mill now sits upon the land of one Thomas Ward,, to whom plaintiff pays $5 per year for the privilege. Said Ward is-the owner of said land upon which said mill stands and pays the-taxes on said land, but pays no taxes on said mill, neither is he-assessed with it. Said land is assessed as though no mill was on it,
    “ If upon the foregoing facts the court shall he of opinion that said mill is assessable as real estate, then the valuation shall be fixed at $400 and the bill shall be dismissed.
    “But if the court shall be of opinion that said mill is not-assessable as real estate, or not taxable as such, then defendants shall be enjoined from the collection of any taxes assessed or levied upon the same.
    “ The costs shall be equally paid by plaintiff and defendants, and either party shall have the right to remove the case to the supreme court.”
    The court entered a decree in favor of the plaintiff in an opinion by Sittser, P. J., of the 44th judicial district, specially presiding, reported in 5 Pa. C. C. R. 224.
    
      The assignments of error specified the action of the court, 1, in enjoining the appellants from the collection of the taxes assessed or levied upon the said mill; and, 2, in not fixing the valuation of the mill at $400.00 and dismissing the bill, under the facts agreed, upon.
    
      
      J. McPherson, with him E. J. Angle, for appellant.
    This-court has placed great importance upon the fact that a thing is mentioned in the enumeration of subjects of taxation in an Act of Assembly. Permanent Bridge Co. v. Frailey, 13 S. & R. 422.
    The quantity of interest that the owners of these things mentioned in the Act have in the lands whereon they are erected or located cannot be interposed to prevent the collection of a tax assessed upon them. Allegheny Co. v. McKeesport Diamond Market, 23 W. N. C. 90.
    The Act should be construed according to common parlance, and in favor of the greatest amount of revenue.
    It has been the uniform practice to assess such mills. This-practice should be considered. Piper v. Singer, 4 S. & B. 355.
    
      James Wood, who was not heard, for appellees.
    The Legislature intend to limit the words, “ mills,” “ furnaces,” “ forges,” etc., to the nature of the property in which they are classed, namely, real estate.
    The purpose for which a thing is constructed and used, to some extent, determines its character. Lemar v. Miles, 4 Watts, 330-3.
    It cannot be inferred from the facts in this case that Finan placed his mill upon Ward’s land with any intention of leaving it there, or making it a part of Ward’s real estate; and if not, the manner of annexation does not make it such. Hill v. Sewald, 53-Pa. 271.
    The distinction between the real and personal character of mills, machinery, etc., is aptly defined, in the case of Patterson v. Delaware Co., 70 Pa. 381.
    In Allegheny Co. v. McKeesport Diamond Market, 23 W. N. C. 90, the building was a permanent structure, made a part of the real estate by its defined character and the purpose for which it was to be used, to wit: “ a public market house.”
    March 21, 1889.
   Per Curiam,

Decree affirmed.