The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-08-23
Supreme C0urt-special Term.
Before Hon. Judge Roosevelt.

RESIDENCE AND TAXATION.
AUGUST 2s-Ryus X. Skeel, vs. Gardner g
Ihtn,pson, S-c--ROOsEvELT, J.-This is an apph-
cati for an irun ,ton to stay the collection Of
tax Of $3ll %, on the personal property OF the
Plaintiff, assessed to him rs a resident of the sow1
81 1 Neweag, in the county Of Orange. "hsTeas HE
in the city Of New York. The plaintiff, it .iIl bs
Observed does not pretend that he is taxed in both
places, nor does he derry that, If relieved from the
NewbuJ taxation, he will escape altogether. Was
equity, Il en-, does his CLAIM present. calling for the
xtnctdinary interpolation Of the court by wav q
Injunction Either the assessment is valid, OF It y
void-if valid, there is, of course. no groani II
complaint in any fcrm-if void, the ollectins on
Ger. by taking and selling the plaiotins furniture
IN Ncwburg wiil be trespasser, and like any other
tres asser, on trial by jury in tho ordinary way,
will &c mulcted in damages. The plaintiffs origi-
nal residence, it would seem, although doing buai-
ness in New York, was in Newburg. He paid his
personal tax there In January, 1853 aud also . tax
on real estate situated there. In May, 1855, after
an ntsonce OF about four moths, he returned with
former residence, and from thlt tune down to tho
present. he aud his family have continued TO 0ccu-
py the house in Newburg, purchased by him in a
prior to the spring OF 1851. Tue Temporary occu-
patton OF q house in New York for a fee msnshG,
ate escape taxation" cannot be regarded On thu
motion. 1t may be that, New York having been
bis PRINCIPAL place Of business" he ought, under
the new law to have paid his personal taxes here.
But he cid not. What hardship, then, under tho
circumstances, is thege in compelling him to pay
elsewhere? Had he fairly stated his case to ths
officers in New York, sud upon such statement been
assessed in New York, and had he then pleaded
that assessment before the officers in NcwbuYg, ~
g,ound for being passed over BY them. proper
case for Function and interplcaaer might, perhaps,
have been pIese nted. But a. the case now standas
whatever may be the ,stri:t law applicable to Il,
ttcie is obviously no equity. and Of course No
ground for the issuiCg Of an equitable iniuncf0u.
Motion denied with costs.
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF NEW YORK.
TAXATION.
TIE Mutual Insurance Company Of Mv Yosf
rs. Tie Bo0rd II Supervisors Of Nov York
ROOSEVELT, J.-By an act Of the Legislaswgt
passed June 20, 1865 it was provided that life -
eral Insurance law should be subject to taxatisa
in the same macner as IL they we're Incorporates
ut er said 80 neral law, with capital Of ono hun-
dd thousand dollars, as required by the sixth So
merely provided, one Of the essential attributes
of their existence, that no mutual life insuraneo
company formed under the act should commences
business until 1t had secured cash capital Of 90
FORE in the act Of 1858. to tho one hundred tcce-
sand dollars, was merely descriptive. ~ was nos y
serted for the purpose Of crca'nS alimit-espe.
CHILLY limit 70 absurdy Inadequate to the extent o
Ia xatiop. TIE old corporations were TO be taxc1
ain The same manner az the Few. And how ~
that The general act having decla ed in expres.
terms that the rev companies should be "decm0d
and taken to be bodies polite and corporate thaU
were held like other corporations, TO be subject q
taxation aon their capital" That was the "man-
nSr" Of their tsxation, the only question being
what funds for that purpose we're to be dccmed
their capital. On that question this Court has -
cioed that all The funds however large which thesa
! companies retain es security, aud on which tbG1
DO busitess, whether more or less constitute thsil
capital. II, then, the free companies are taxed a
such cspital to its ftN amount, be II ever 90 large
why should the chartered companies be privileged
to one huIe red thousand liars! Would su \ {
system be taxing TIC latter On the ssrae. OF would Y
he In a very different manner from The former Il
a. pears to me that although some what ambizu
ously, ard perhaps adEoitly wusaed, the meaniot
ever may bare Ssen tbe iDteEii,n az /. e cutsid'
craftsman IA sufii .ently clear TO enable the Ccur
t, ccciac according to tho obyicus right Of ~
case, and 10 prevent what would otherwise be y
exeroasc e. very undue partially la favor OF -
OLD 70 Tire o. eiadicc Of tue ne sinsttuti,as. II
! inoemglt sl srec,d term ough. to be affirmed.