The Daily clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1866-1888, 1876-02-08
LEGAL INTELLIGENCE
SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI
Gases Decided Monday, Feb. 7.
PREPARED FOR THE CLARION BY FRAME
JOHNSTON, ESQ.
.s. and Il. Green VS. .E.R. Horn. Tax
Collector.

F''' " "CO COITG Oy 1EYTON, CH. Z,
An assessment of $4,000 was made against
= yf; anu l. Green by the Tax Assessor OF
ZINES county. The Assessor himself MAX
ing the assessment returned the LIST TO the
bodru OF supervisors, by whom it was an
proven. but no notice in writing of the as
SessDent was given to J. and T. Green.
pom Tue refusal of j. and T. Green to paw
Che lax on TINS assessment, a levy was made
on their real estate. Thereupon thew fled
Dill in equity and obtained an ininncrion
restraining the collection of the tax upon
the ground that it was illegal for reasons
presently 70 be stated. The cause was card
on Dill and answer, and an agreed state of
Iacts VIZ: That che whole assessment of
10000 should represent in equal parts. Uni.
ted States bonds, United States Treasury
notes, n National Bank notes, money deposi-
tea with d. and I. Green, bankers. and
money deposited by them in New York city.
Inc questions presented to the Chancellor
were, whether these various funds could
legally be taxed by the State of Mississippi.
Ana The further question whether the action
OF the Board of Supervisors in approving the
assessment, without objection from J. & T.
Green, was conclusive on the the latter as
TO legality of the taxes imposed on the as
sessment On the final hearing of the case
IN the Chancery Court, it was admitted by
Horns solicitor that the State could not
legally tax either the United States Bonds
or the money deposited with j. & T. Green
by their depositors. The Chancellor de-
cided, that the tax on the United States
Treasury Notes, and the tax on the money
deposited in New York city, by j. & T.
Green, were illegal, but that the State had
the power to tax the National Bank Notes
owned by j. & L. Green. And the Chan
Gerry Court decided, also, that the complain
ants were not concluded by the action of
the Board of Supervisors, in receiving and
approving the assessment
Both parties appealed from this decree,
and the Gro s appeals presented the follow
ing questions for the decision of the
Supreme Court.
L. Has this State the power to levy tax
upon the Treasury Notes of the Uuittd
States, known as legal tender notes
LII. Has the State the power to tax the
notes known as National Bank Notes
III. Is money deposited in New York
by j. q T. Green, citizens of the State of
Mississippi, subject Go Taxation by this
State?
". Are J. & T. Green concluded by the
action of the Board of Supervisors in re-
ceving and approving the assessment?
r>I'he Sup?elpe Court decided these questions
as J0ll0acs:
L. The treasury notes were issued by the
United States as means to carry out the
constitutional powers of the government;
they are obligations or securities of the gov
eminent and are expressly exempted from
State taxation 10y the acts OF Congress pro
viding for their issuance. The government
of the United States had the constitutional
power to protect these notes from State
taxation. Getting Bank vs.. Supervisors OF
Wallace p. 26.)
II. The acts of Congress of February
18th, 1869, aud June 3D., 1864, provided tor
the establishment of National banks, and
the issuance of National Bank notes. The
fundamental purpose of the acts in estab-
l;-I,s, fh hon lie w
| collection of internal duties, the transfer
| and disbursement of public moneys and to
| provide a uniform note circulation coll
| vertible into notes of the United States, and
to be converted into coin as soon as
the government should provide for the
redemp tiOn of its own notes. These notes
are substantially obligations of the govern
ment, for it is ultimately boInd for their
| Daymept. The qualities, powers and duties
/ Of these banks as national agencies or in
| struments, resemble, in all essential partlc-
ulars those Of the Bank of the United States
chartered in 1916, and are SUBJECT TO no con-
| troll except that of the National Govern
ment. A State therefore has no legal pow
| en- to lay a tax on those notes. (Cltlng Nc
| Culooh US the State of Maryland and Osborn
VS.. the United States.)
| Ill. Land having sftuS of its own car
Orly be taxed by the State where located
and. as an exception to the general rule az
|
its own and is governed by the same rule o.
| taxation. but chooses in action follow the
demicil of the owner, and may be taxed by
the State ia which the owner resides
Therefore the money deposited in New OIL
| being debt or chose in action belonging u
J. and t. Green was legally subject co taxa
ton in Mississippi
". The Statutes require, where a taX-paye
| fails to render his assessment, that the 1a2
Assessor may make the assessment on Sucl
information as he can obtain, and return tn
! assessment TO the Board of Supervisors, bu
he must give notice III writing to the tax
naver. of such assessment. For the reason
that no such notice was given by the Asses
sor. the action of the Board of supervisors II
approving the assessment is not conctuslv
on the eomplainants. Code OF 1S7l-9l6o2.
IF the Statute had been complied with, tn
action of the Board in approving TIL
assessment, without objection, would nav
concluded the complainants. ReuerSed an
xy1d1