New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1878-10-22
4 DECISION As TO DISTRICT BONDS.

IHE AIroRNEY-GuNEEAL GIVES AN OPINION AZ TO
WHITTIER IuEsE BONDS ARE TNEMPr WHEN
HELD IS BANK CAPITAL.
WAsIuNGroN, Oct. 21.-On the 27th of last
month Attorney General Dcycns was requested by
secrcfnry sherman 10 express au opinion whether,
der the provisions of Section 5,2l5 Of the Revised
statutes Of the United States, National Bank, in
1vng AZ the amount Of taxable capital stock beyond the
amount invested IN United states bonds shall be allowed
10 deduct the amount invested In 1nyyear 365 funding
bonds Of District OF Columbia issued under the Act
Of June 20. 1874 inc Attorney General filed his
opinion to-day. lie says:
The District Of Columbia an expiring corporation
and as corporate legal entity u ceased To exist by the
operation OF this act. The Sinking Fund Commissioners
Tutd states ana the issuing Of these bonds was the
mean. provided bv the United states By when certain
Liabilities the District were 10 be DISCHARGED AS the
thus ceased 10 exist, ana rs the bonds were
prepared issued BY the Commissioners OF the sinking
the fth OF the United states pledged TO provide by
legislation for me pnymen oi rnelPat nn%
from f treasury as by causing to De levied upon the
propcfty In the District such taxes a5 would proFue le
revenue necessary Tor Tue payment 81 the interest on
said bonds ana create sinking fund for the payment OF
III Ic % Iii,i,ps of the United states to the pay
mcut OF the interest aud principal Of which ITS faith
IN Wo9d scrn 10 be clear that fact that they are
obligations of the United states does not dspoSe OI to
gu, 5Ih WincL t, neg S tbIs statute. II could not
have ben within the contemplation OF Congress at the
-
OF the revision include the bonds OF Tue DIsrCJ VI
Columbia within those exempt rom taxation uhutI
section 9l4 Of the Revised statutes because thy were
not M existence II Is that they coud nave Dtcn
Included by subsequent legislation 10 Is important III
tbis connection 10 observe that IN all the legislation re-
latinV to the bonds m question, thCy are never
-poI,,n OF as United states bonds put Always
IA Tie bonds Of the District OF Columbia: -,
The concH', ION 10 witch arrive upon TINS point R at
the bonds OF the District Of ColumDa Hio ~, HOo
United States bonds within the meaning OF SecIoh
52Ii OF tho Revised Statutes. . A. 4. e..,,.,
have considered the inquiry with relation 10 Secuoh
52I4 Of the Revised Statutes although the question re-
fers To Section 5215 ms the expression III tne aIleL
must be governed by its In the former section as
tLc purpose OF your inquiry ia to determine, NhfthSr
these bonds are 10 treated as United states pOhIs III
arriving al The amount OF taxable capital STOCKS Vi va
tonal banks II Is proper 20 consider whether tno aUt
that The bonds OF the District OF Columbia are eAept
from taxation authorizes their deduoloh nO h tIo
amount of capta stock over ana ABOVE uhaI WHICH 10
invested I'm United States bonds, properly socaeu III as
ccrtainirC the amount OF taxable capltai stOcA'
The G cucral declares that the tax IN Ques
ton Is tax upon franchise lie Is compelled therefore,
% come 10 the result that in estimating the capital stock
of Rational banks which is liable TO duty there cannot
M abducted tberc(rom the 800 bonds Of the District OF
Columbia which they now own. The franchise tax IS
Unused without reference the inquiry whether prop
erty s Invested in taxable or nOn-taXaDe securities