The Morristown gazette. [volume] (Morristown, Tenn.) 1867-1920, 1874-03-18
IMPORTANT DECISION OF
THE SUPREME COURT.
Clerks and CLERKS and Masters Hare
TO Make Assessment Returns.
Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Nicholson,

CLERKS and CLERKS and Masters Haze
to Mike Assessment Returns.
March z, 1874.
II. Y. RIDDLE, c. & NJ, Ex PARTE.
The Clerk and Master of the
Chancery Court at Lebanon, having
in his hands as clerk the funds oil
various parties. subject to distribu-
ton under the orders of the court,
submitted to the Chancellor, by pc
tition, the question, whether it was
his duty under section 50 of the
Assessment Act of March %, 1873,
to report said funds for assessment.
The Chancellor held that the funds
should be assessed for taxation, and
that the same should be reported
to the assessor for that purpose.
From this holding the owners of the
funds have appealed.
The section of the act of 1878,
under which the question arises, is
as follows:
Sec. SO. 'sThat persons acting
as executors, administrators, guar
dians. agents or attorneys or in any
fduciary capacity whatever, shall
make a return of the property,
moneys, credits and effects held by
them in either of said capacities,
seperate from their individual re-
turns, and the same shall be listed
separately for taxation" etc.
1t is insisted for the appellants,
that the true construction of this
section is, that if the clerk is merely
the custodian of the property or
moneys, the rights of the parties
being fixed, the same should be as
sessed by and in this manner. But
if the clerk has special property
in property or funds as trustee, ETC.,
by virtue Of an appointment of the
court, the real owners not being
SUI jlnris, or their rights not being
settled, the assessment should be
made by and in the name of the
clerk.
We are unable to discover in the
language of this section, that the
Legislature intended to make the
distinction contended for. The
leading object was to provide the
means by which all property, moneys
ETC., should be reached for taxation.
To ascertain and assess all such
property, money, etc, was the first
thing to. be secured. To effect this
object, section 50 was intended to
reach all such property, moneys,
ETC.. not in the actual possession or
under the actual control of the
owners thereof. Hence, it is made
the duty of all persons acting as
executors, administrators, guardians,
agents, or i'll any fiduciary capacity
whatever, to mako returns, etc.
The language is as broad and COM
prehensive as words could well make
it. 1t was not intended that this
duty should be confined to execu-
tors, administrators, guardians, or
others acting in any fduciary ca
pacity whatever, bat it is expressly
imposed also on agents or attor-
neys." That this language was not
used with the intention Of embracing
other agents than those having a
special property in the funds, as
trustee, ETC., by virtue Of IN appoint
ment Of the court, seems clear from
the care with which it is provided
that "agents or attorneys" shall
make return, and then that all per-
sons "in any fiduciary capacity
whatever" under the appointment of
the court. which is by no means con-
ceded, yet it is clear that he holds
them as agent of the owners thereof
and as such is bound to return them
for assessment.
We think the argument, db bc0R-
UeRiento. against this construction,
is answered by the fact that such
funds are required to be returned
seperate from the clerks individual
returns, and by sec. so the assess
ments are to be returned to the
County Court, wheret the owner of
the funds can readily see whether
or not their funds have been assessed
twice, and have the error corrected.
We are of opinion that the Chan
cellor's holding was correct, and we
affirm it with costs
NICHOLSON, C. J.