The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1867-10-29
UNITED STATES SUPREME CoURT,
s.i,ona, Bank sha. es end state TAXA
tIon--The Distinction Between a
Tax ON Bank Capital and Bank

snttonnI Bank Shas e. end state Taxa
! ttop-..The Distinction Between a
Tax ON Bank Capital and Bank
shares.
Fso7i he Neg York Herald.
Tobias s. Bradley ct al. rs. The People
of ILtin0is-In error to the Supreme
Court OF Illinois.-The plaintiffs in
error were owners OF the capital stock
| of The Second National Bank of Peoria.
The assessor OF the town of Peoria as
sessed the shares of the bank at their
par value. The plaintiffs in error. be-
| iieving the assessment unauthorized,
applied by petition to the Board OF So
| pervisors of their county, and that
board, after consideration, held the
shares were not subject to taxation, ana
granted the prayer of the petlpouers,
that the assessment be stricken from
the lists.
| The State Auditor declined to approve
| the action of the Board, and brought
the case into court under an act author
| izinE the proceeding TO test the ques-
| tions involved. The cause was taken TO
| the Supreme Court of the State, where,
after considering the objections of the
| Auditor, "that the money invested In
such shares is clearly within the mean
ing of the term investment in stocks,
| as defined in the second section oil the
act of February IL, 1858; that the rate
| of taxation sought to be levied on Tue
| shares was no greater than would be
| levied on the capital stock or shares oil
State banks, and therefore not IN con-
| PREVENTION of the provisions of section
| forty-ons of the act OF June ), 1864
and that the taxation sought to be I'M
posed was not in violation of any law
Of Congress exempting United States
| bonds from taxation under state au-
thority." The order of the Eoard OF
Supervisors WAS reversed and annulIed
| The cause thence came here.
Mr.. Justice Nelson delivered the
opinion of the court, in substance as
follows: The case came before that
court on an appeal from decision OF
the Board of Supervisors OF the county
Of Peoria, by which they had refused 10
assess u State and county tax on the
shares Of bradley and Howell in the
First and Second National Banks OF
Peoria. The appeal was taken by the
Auditor OF Public Accounts, in behalf
of the State. The Supreme Court re-
yersed this decision OF the board, and
held the shareholders liable to the tax.
The ground of exemption relied on,
both before the Supervisors and the
supreme Court, was want of authority
in the board, within the forty-nrst sec
ton of the National Bank act of June,
1864, and particularly within the sec
ond provision of that section, which de-
clares that the tax "Should not exceed
the rate imposed upon the shares in
any of the banks organized under the
authority OF the States" The act OF the
State, dated February II. 1857, provides
for taxing the capital stock OF the
banks, together with the surplus profits
or reserved funds. No tax is imposed
specially on the shares held by the
stakeholder. This qaestion came be-
fore US in The case OF Van Allen Us the
Assessors, q Wall, 573, ISL, from New
York, where the statute taxing the
State banks was substantially like that
of Illinois. We then held the tax IN
authorized for the defect stated. 1t was
in that case attempted to be sustained
on the same ground relied on here, that
the tax on the capital was equivalent
TO The tax on the shares, as respected
the shareholders. Butthe position was
answered that, admitting it to be so,
vet, inasmuch as the capital OF the
State banks may consist OF the bonds
of the United States, which were ex-
emptj from State taxation, it was not
easy TO see that the tax on the capital
was an equivalent to the tax on the
shares. We see no distinction between
the two cases, and the Judgment of the
court below must be reversed, and the
proceedings remanded, with directions
TO enter a Judgment affirming the de-
ClsiOn of the Board OF Supervisors.