The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-06-27
Supreme Cour.-Generoi Germ.

Before Hon. Judges Mitchell, Roosevelt and Cerke.
LIABILITY OF CORPORATE COMPANIES TO TAXATION
The Mutual Life Insurance Companv of Nato
Yo,k against Joseph Jenk'ins--By the Court Roose
vet 1.-The plaintiffs insist that they are not liable
to taxation, and have brought this action against
the tax collector Tor wrongfllly, they contend,
leyying on their property. Corporations 1t is al.
mitted. liable TO taxation their capital, bat
mutual insurance companies, like the plaintiffs it is
argued, have capital. This position it seems to
me, is not maintainahe either in principle or III the
letter OF the law. The word capital, in its general
acceptation, end where not otherwise specially de-
fined, means the stock or fand On which an indi-
vdua, or firm, or corporation, trades or carries on
business Cease Of the Mutual Insurance Company
Of Buffalo, Comstock, 442) Where fixed sum, i'll
given instance. is especially declared to be the
capitol, that sum, whether increased by profits or
diminished by losses, is taken the OF tax
alton, not from any principle buI because such hap
pens to be the wording OF the particular act char
ter. Such was the case OF the Bank Of Utica, in
Paige R., 500. All moneyed or stock corporations
deriving an income or profit Liable to taxation
their capital and, Of course, if that capital be not
otherwise limited, on the fund upon which they do
business. corporation authorized by law to make
insurances whe Their on fires or on lves, is moneyed
corporation, and may make profits, although e0 no
mine, it makes no periodical dividends. In the Mu-
tual Life Insurance Company, who are the plaintiffs
in this case every customer, IN proportion to the
business he brings to the concern is stakeholder
His shares instead OF being, as in ordinary corpora
tons, exact aliquot parts of the common fund, are
graduated by the premiums be may see lit to con-
tributes and the common fund or capital instead OF
being confined to a fixed, invariable sum, grows
with the growth of those prebiums the interest be-
ing, in the first instance, resored to for the pay
ment Of losses. The mere circumstance that por-
ton of the common fund is lab to be withdrawn
on tie happening of death, does not destroy its
character capital; the same result follows from
death in the Of private partnership, aud from
fire or shpwreck in the case of an ordinary insu-
rance company. The company themselves, in their
invitations to the public, obviously contemplate
their moneys and securities as capital They speak
Of the stability and perpetuttyn of their business
as founded on 'an accumulated fund of million of
dollars, securely invested in bonds and mortgages"
&c. And in the act of incorporation, when direct
ing the investment of the premiums received for
insurance., it is provided that the real property to
secure such investment of capital shall in every
case be worth twice the amount loaned thereon"
The conclusion, then, is, that this accumulated
fund" by whatever name it may be designated, is
the corporate property of the plant s, and not the
individual property of the stockholders or contribu
tors, except in the same sense and with the same
qualifications as the capital of any moneyed corpo
ration not founded on the mutual principles; and
that the plaintiffs therefore, are liable to taxation
in respect of such fund, in the same manner any
other corpc ration in respect of its capital
Judgment of Special Term, for the reasons assign
ed by the Judge who pronounced the same, affirmed
xrith