The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-08-02
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.
THE SUCCESSION TAx-wHEN THE ESTATE BE-
COMES LIABLE

WAsnISGroS, August /, 1877
No. POI. Otis Clapp, Collector Of Internal Revenue,
plaintiff IN error, vs.. William T. Mason and Charles
Henry Parker in error to the Circuit Court OF the
United States for the District OF Massach usatsThe
plaintiffs below brought their action against the Col
lector OF Internal Revenue back tax paid
to him to avoid distrainL The facts these: Twill
lam r. Mason, the plaintiffs testator, died December
L. 1867. By his will the real estate upon which the
tax in question was lowed was devised TO his widow
Tor her life or until she should occupy the
same as place OF residence, aud upon her death or
ceasing so to occupy the same, to The plaintiff The
widow occupied the said real estate as her residence
until her death, June IL, 1872 Tho In question
was assessed tho 18TH OF May 1879 by tho
the plainua PAID the defendant tho SAID
tax under protest, TO AVOID distraint
other iorcible process TO collect the same.
gave judgment that the party paying should recover
back the with interest The collector appeals
Tho relationship II any between the deceased and the
devisees does not appear The identity Of names is
suggestive upon the point but no facts IN relation TO
It are contained IN the record II is conceded that
nnaer The United states statute of 1864 the tax
have been proper The statute Of July H. 1870,
repealed the taxes imposed by the act Of 1854 on
legaces and SUGGESTIONS alter the lst day OF August,
1870 (6 Statutes Uuited States, 26l section III The
repealing contained the following provso "And all
anu all the provisions OF said acts shall continue
full iorce for ievying and collecting all taxes prop
ery liable to be assessed or accruDg under
tho provisions OF former acts drawbacks the right
to which has already accrued or which may hereafter
accrue under said acts. and Tor the maintaining and
continuing liens nnes penalties and Iorfeturcs in
Cured and by virtue thereof aud this act shall
not be construed affect any act done, right accrued
or penalty incurred under former acts but every snch
act Is hereby saved Tho collector insists that the
tax upon In question had accrued before
the repeal the act flS64to w.t. that accrued upon
tho death OF the estaor IN 1867 The contend
that the tax did not accrue until they came into
the possession of the land, and that before this
Cured the statute authorizing tho tax was repealed
The question Is, When did the right to this tax &C.
crue-at death Of the the death OF the
widow, when the plaintiff became entitled to the pos
session Of the land? By the statute OF 1884, part
OF system OF taxation made necessary ny the exist
ence q civil war, tax was Imposed upon the sue
cession real estate 3 Statutes at Large 2S7 The
term ''rea estate defined 70 include all lands ten
ements and Entertainments corporeal and incorporcal
and succession" declared TO denote 'the devo-
luton of title any real estate (sec l26l BY
ton 127 II is provided that any disposition
by will deed, descent, by reason whereof
any person shall become benehcialy entitled
in possession or expectancy to any rcal
estate or any interest therein upon the death OF any
person, shall be deemed to COME: succession The
argument made upon this section by the plaintiff in
error, that the will OF William r. Mason conveyed an
| estate to William Mason and Charles Ii. Parker. and
that although they were not emitted TO immediate
possession they had vested estate and that the
cesson such estate was made taxable, we readily
admit We agree further that vested estates not only.
but estates which not vesed-those expectancy
merely-are within the statute (Wmple va florida,
2 John, r., 2SS) The admission, however, does not
aid In deciding the point before US, as the question
of time still arises When Is this vested estate tax
ableY The decision Is that the succession Is
able until the IL entitled to possession In
this case the successor did not become titled the
possession enjoyment OF the estate until the death
OF the widow which occurred June IL, 1872 The
saving clause, therefore, does not reach the case.
Affirmed. Mr. Justice Hunt delivered the opinion.