The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-07-27
HapertaaS - Tax Payers.
6UrknGH 0OUxr-sPROIALr s9N.
Before Hon. .Jndyo Rnasovalt.

july 26.-Waliam Samuel johnson Us. The
Srprc,sors cf Nsso Ywk and the Supervisors
IT CaHsTdhgts, Sc-Mr. johnson. the plain
tiff, has two residences-one in New York, tho
other in Cattaraugus. He has been taxed for
his personal property in both The law says that
for all personal estate, wherever situated owned by
party, he shall be taxed in the town ward where
he resides Il Il. 8. 3S9.] And the question now
presented is which Of Mr. Johnsons two residences,
In the Of this statute, Is the proper place OF
taxation-it being conceded that he cannot legally
be assessed in both. The Supervisors the local tri
buIas in such matters, taking opposite views of the
law have in each case decided against him. Those
Of New York insist on Their claim, and those OF Cat
taraugus refuse to rclinquish. In this delimma Mr..
Johnson os was done in Thomson vs Ebbetts RI Hop
kin's Chancery Report. 272,] files his bill Of inter
pleader, praying that he may be allowed to pay the
amount into Court, and be discharged, leaving the
two rival claimants to ltigate between themselves.
To this bill the Corporation counsel demurs, ia.
sstiDg that Mr. johnson should either determine for
himself which OF the two counties is in the right.
and pay that and resist the other; II Doubtful set
both at defiance and leave the rghttu claimant to ss
tablish his case and the wrongful one to be defeated
Two independent litiga ions, it Is obvious, must DO
the result if such demurrer be sustained, and an
innocent person. who has really no interest In either
must be the actor and sufferer in both. Suppose.
moreover, that Mr.. Johnson as Is suggested, should
take an appeal, by way Of certorari from the SUI
pervisors OF Cattaraugus county to the Supreme
Court, sitting in that district aud another appeal in
like manner, from the Supervisors oil New York
county to the Supreme Court sitting in this dis
trct and suppose the two sets Of Judges OF the SUI
preme Court, viewing the question at issue-a not
very Improbable occurrence-in different lights,
should arrive at different conclusions, Mr.. Johnson
In that event, must again. for his protection carry up
both cases to the court of last resort. Or taking
another course-suppose he should allow the ,ileo-
tors in both counties at their peril to sieze and sell
his furniture and then both. In two separate &C
tions (for he could not join them in 0ne,) for the
separate trespasses; in that also similar round
Of double expense and double vexaton must be the
consequences. To avert such embarrassmeats the
bill OF interpeader invented. 1t is benign pro-
ceeding, and entitled to the favorable consideration
Of the courts. The only inquiry presented il, are
there opposing claimants, and is there fair bona
fds question to be investigated in order to determine
the right. Mr. Johns0n's bill it cannot be denied,
makes out precisely such state of things In
deed, the question raised-that of residence-is
not only fair one, but, upon the admitted facts,
one OF the most difficult known to the law. The
plaintiff had residence Of thirty years in the CITY,
and never intended to abandon it. He never was in
any profession or trade other than that Of lawyer,
and never practised in any other place than this city
occupation Of his family, and at the time of the as
sesment in New York, his family were in its actual
occupancy. On the other hand, 10 the year 1861, he
fitted up house in Cattaraugus for summer resi-
dence and when assessed in that county was, with
his family in its actual occupancy. having also an Of
fee in it, where be transacted his land business, which
was mostly in that and the adjoining counties. and
which is now the only business in which he is en-
gagged Mr.. Johnson therefore, it is obvious, in point
of fact has two residences, although in point Of law
he can have but one 1t is for the Court to determine
which is that one. As MIR. johnson has no interest
in the determination, he has right to throw the lt
cation upon those who have. The bill Of interplea-
must be overrued, aud special order entered, to be
first submitted for approval.