Cleveland morning leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1854-1865, 1858-12-11
Injunction FOrbidding the G


| The Legislature last winter passed an act en-
titled "An act to tax the property of Banks and
| Bankers, so as to require all property employed
| in banking to bear burden o. taxation equal
to that imposed upon the property of other per
sons" Under this law the Treasurers of the
several counties have sought to compel the va
| riOus Branches of the State Bank of Ohio to
pay the usual tax upon capital, which they Lave
declined doing, under the law passed Feb. "A,
| lS45, which provides that if the banks shall
semi-annually, at the usual period of declaring
dividend, set off to the State six per cent. OF
the profits it shall be received IN lieu of all
tareS to which said Company or the stockhold-
ers would be subject on account of stock owned
| by them.
John McColgin, Esq, Treasurer of Brown
| County, undertook, or was about instituting
proceedings, to compel the Branch of the
State Bank at Ripley, to pay the tax
levied upon the grand duplicate under the
law passed by the last Legislature. The
attorneys for the Bank yesterday filed bill
in Chancery in the United States Court, pray
ing that an injunction may issue restrain
ing the said Treasurer from proceeding to col
lect the tax levied against the Bank. Upon
the reading OF the bill, Judge Leavitt granted
full and complete Injunction, as prayed for the
Bank officers alleging that they have faithfully
complied with the law of 1915, by setting off
the six per cent to the State, but that the State
Auditor refuses to draw an order for the funds
SO appropriated.
The act of last winter is similar in effect to
one VIII ch was passed some few years ago, bet
ter known as the "Crowbar Law under which
it was claimed the County Treasurers had
right to even force their way to the vaults of
the several Banks, and seize upon and sell any
Several cases were carried to the Supreme
Court of the State, which affirmed the constitu-
tionality of the law. The United States Cir.
cult Court, however, declared the act unconsti-
tutional, and upon an appeal to the Supreme
Court of the United States, the decision of the
Supreme Court of Ohio was reversed, and that
of the Circuit Court sustained. In other words
the act levying the tax was declared unconsti-
tutional
The same principles are involved in the law
OF last winter, and the granting of the iDJunc
ton by the United States Court yesterday indi
Gates the course which will be taken in all sim
liar cases where proceedings are instituted for
the collection of the tax against the branches
of the State Bank The decision is one of
great impOrtance.-CjH. GG=.
Hereis another ''pretty kettle of fish" The
present Legislators of Ohio are such bingling
tinkers that the County Auditors are utterly
at loss to know how to get the. Banks upon the
tax duplicate, and here in the midst of the per-
plexity comes in the Federal Courts with
their restraining injunctions. In addition to
the instance given above, we learn that within
a few days Judge Wilson has issued an injunc-
ton forbidding the payment of taxes by the
Directors Ofthe Bank of Geauga. In the mean
time the County Auditors are looking to the
Supreme Court of the State, now in session at
Columbus, for some sort of aid. So the wretch
ed dance goes on, with heavy bills of litigation
for the Counties to pay. 1t is sincerely to be
hoped that the tax payers of Ohio have reached
pretty nearly to the end of LocOfoco Legislation.