The New York herald., 1877-07-04
of committee 10 take charge OF the estate fearing her
daughter may be induced by her husband 10 sign II
ove q

over 10 him.
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.
THE cHoRPENNING cAsg-AcTIoN OF CONGRESS
REGARDING IT-pEcIsIoN OF THE COURT OF
CLAIMS AFFIRMED--srArE TAXATION OF
SHARES IN NATIONAL BANxs-MAY BE ABOVE
PAR.
WASHINGTON, July 3, 1871
The following decisions have been rendered by the
United States Supreme Court
No 6l3. George Chorpenning. appellant vs.. The
United statcs-Appeal from The Court OF Cluns.-ine
appellant rests his CLAIM upon the act OF Congress OF
March 3 1887, IL Stat 52i and the resolution vi Con-
gress OF July Is, 1870, 16 stat. 67a
Under the act OF 1857 Postmaster General Brown on
the 25h day Of May and 3Oth Of June. 1851, awarded
the claimant OF $50 U0o Ss9 s42
and $2s, $50 95 which were paid 10 him. He received
pesou cour, Of Claims serrns
that he ~as entitled 70 further compensation
aud damaged under the act The Court OF CLAIMS hold
that the action of the Postmaster General and Tho pay
ment ana receipt of the sums awarded were huai snd
conclusive between the parties (Chorpenning w. Inc
petition WAS dismissed. Tho claimant appealed 10 this
Court while the appeal was pending Congress passed
the resolution oi July To- 1870 Under that resolution
Postmaster General Creswell found there due 10
the ciaimuutthc Iurther sum OF S443 0l0 20. Before
anything iurther was zone Congress Dy resouaon I
the resolution oil the l5h OF july, 1870, under whcn
the last adjustment was made, and by the act OF
March 8, 1871 llt STAT, 5l9 directed that no part OF
the money thereby appropriated for tho use o! tnc
Post OtHc. Department should 'bo applied TO the pay.
mcnt what Is known as the CnorI Icuning CLAIM. "
Upon snaiyzinx the resolution OF 1870 is found TO
contain the following provisions:--
l. The Postmaster General authorized to ''in-
vestigate and ADJUST anew the Claims o George Chor-
penang under tue first section vi Of 1897, ION
The basis o compensation allowed by said act tor reg
uInr mail service. "
= And the claim growing out OF the curtailment
and annuinent Of hi. contract Oh route No. IL SOL ON
era tor the service To oe settled provided Tor the
services nalnod IN said act.
j. "And the right OF appeal from the proceedings Of
the Postmaster General 10 the Court oi Claims" was
'rese. vod and allowed 10 SAID CLAIMANT
Tho act oi 1857 became de,uuct by what occurred
under II IN that year. II was IN NO wise revived Wy tho
resolution OF iS7O was oniy referred to By that res
oiuion Tor the, ruies and basis upon which ihe new
adjustment authorized was to proceed.
The question before US Is as the effect OF the re-
peaIing resolution OF 1871. In considering that SUB.
ject, Vie act VI lso! may DO LAID ol vlcw aud VIII
not DC further advcrted to.
The resolution reiied upon by the appellant was
wholly upatera. 1t contained no stipulation OF
payment, express or implied. Congress, tor own
reasons SIMPLY directed examination and
adjustment II gave no promise aud camc under
ceived none IRON him. The government nnd tho
claimant stood aud continued to stand wholly indc-
pendent oi each othcr Tne government could NJ any
time before payment recall wna u hud done. and tho
cialnant was ut liberty up 70 the same period TO re-
fuse concurrence and assert aunde his lega! rghs
any he had. Prior 10 tnat tine there could be no
vested right and no conmittnept of either parry
not subject 10 the exercise thereafter of such
discretion, Affirmative or negative, as might be
deemed proper. The case presents the same legal
aspect AS II It we're between individula IL
merchant should direct his clerk or other agent TO
'sinvestigae und aaJust tho CLAMP OF third party
upon prescribed basis, and the adjust made
accordingly, Can II be doubted mat the merchant might
thereafter. because he mad come 10 tho conciu-
that the clam was tainted with fraud or been
already iuliy pa,d 0rrom any other reason, or as
matter Of choice without assigning uny reason, de-
cline 10 recosnlzs what had been done OF any
validity aud Withdraw the authority under which the
proceeding mad been taKehY Tue reason OF ING right
would Dc that there was no binding mutualIty OF
assent, no consideration, und hence NO legal obxa-
tion resting upop either party.
The duty dcvolved upon the Postmaster General was
wholly mInstcria ami IN no sense Judicial or tnat Of
arbitrator The record discloses no element of
arpilramcnt The adjustment. having been made
under special law, renders 1t in different
regards the point We considering from those made
daily by the accounting officers o tho government.
under the general law conerring their powers nnd
prescribing their duties The idea that the govern
hnally concluded by the results at whicn thay
may arrvo would be regarded AS novelty AZ, and
without tho several departments. ~
The implication from the repeal OF the rcsoiutiVn Of
1870 and the prohibition IN INC act Of lsl is clear
that Congress did mol intend that anything more
should be paid To tho claimant without further au-
tnor.y from that body (Unted States vs. Baboitt,
Black, 53l This case Is not dstinguisbable IN prn.
cipls from Gordon the UnIed States, Wall, 1888.
ASIDE from the views have expressed that acjud-
cation 10 onciusye authority against the appellant
ur attention has becu called by the counsci on both
Sides cluuse OF the resolution giving me claim
the right OF appeal from tho ndngs OF the Post.
master General TO the Court OF Claims. Tue view
which take OF the Case rcndcrs II unnecessary 10
consider that point and We express no opinion upon
Mr. Justice Swayne delivered tho opinion
No. 04a The People OF the State oi New York ex rel
The Guatin National Bank ct AL plaintiffs IN error,
vs. The commissioners OF Taxes md Assessments 10
tho city OF New YorK.-ln error 10 the Court OF APP
peals Of the State OF New York.
The reIators com planned tEut their shares Of stock
In the National Gautn Bank assessed at large
= sum. They appealed IRON the judgment OF the
Court Of Appeals SUSTAINING the Of the
Commissioners OF Taxes, which likes the taxable
value o such shares ut $50 each, whereas the par or
nomiual vuue OF such shares Is $50 each. Mauy
Qttn ore ssed sQI
the argument to which We do not think II necessary
to refer. We place our Judgment upon single ground.
The laws Of the State OF New York provide that
shares stock ike those refer to snail be assessed
son tho value'' Of the shares and 'thelr toll and
same IN payment ol just debt due rom solvent
aeotor dcducting the proportional value OF The real
estate owned by .ho bank g stat N y, 1850, D.
l,6I7, ch. II; / X. s. N. Y. 393 III
The assessors were justified under this authority in
fixing the value, as we have stated The appraisal D-
cluded the reserve fund, when Is much part or
the property OF tho bank and goes lx value of
the sharcs equally rs IL u were not called by that
name out remained as part OF tho specie, bills dis
counted other iuuds vi the bank. undIstlng ushed
from the general mass.
rho acl Of Congress OF June 1864 provides that tho
States may tie shares o national banks subject
irst, that the taxauon shall not be
s.at greater rate assessed upon moaeyed
capital tho hands Oi individual citlzcns Oi such
State - and second, "that the tax SO imposed
shall not exceed the rate imposed upon tho shares OF
any OF tue banks organized under the authority OF the
State whore SUCH association Is located" l3 Stat.
ut Large. l12) In Hepburn vs.. The School Directors.
this Court decided gbat making assessment Of bank
shares by TINS authority II competent to ASSESS
Them at amount above their par value. (23 Wall,
4S0)
but tho rcators insist that by the act Of the Legis
lature of the O New York, passed March o. 1865,
enacted that the shares OF bank couId not be
assessed at an amount greater than the par value
thereof ant thai such statute created contract WIN
tue banks organized under the same which could not
bo altered by subsequent Legislature. Honce IT IS
argued that the act vi 1896 authorizing suc shnres 10
be assessed which may exceed their par value
~ law mparing the obiigaton ol Contract ana ~
vod The section OF the statute of 1868 referred 10 10
as follows, VIZ. -
10. All the shares Ia any OF the said banking
organized under th, hs OF
held by person body corporate, shall be in
cuded la the valuation of the property OF such
body corporate corpcraton the
In the town ward sucb bankius associa
tom is located aud not elsewhere whether the holder
thereof resides In such town ward but not at
greater than IN assessed other moneyed capital
hands of individuals VI the STATE provided tbx the
upon such shares shall exceed
value thereof aud provided further, that the Of
such associations shall be subject TO state county
ncipa to the extent according t0 ito value,
other al estate Is taxed.
bce "a VA w a m I'm bec