Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1888-10-18
AReUaENr 0LoSht.
Ahe Cnse OF the National HanI,s Va.
the State Ereusrtrer fsnauea

.A'o oA thc National Ranks W..
thc state Treasurer Opened.
AZ the United States court on Tuesday
suages Mck imam and Wales sitting. tho
ten VS., William Herbert, State treasurer,
was called. Benlgmin Nields, Esq,. an,
pearec Tor the bank, and ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
John Biras, Levi O. Bird, ESD, and 4. n
sanborn, Esq., for the State.
The history Of the cAse, which has already
peen dstailed, is briefly az follows snme
years ago, che then State treasurer, Robert
!. Reynolds, was about to levy upon the
property Of the bank for thu collection III
Wy claimed TO be due the State, when an
injunction wes Issued restraining him from
further proceedings. The eaae d a test eas .
Involving the question Of tho liability al
tnb National Benks 10 this State for the
payment OK tax upon all their shares of
STOCK. The tax Is sne.fourth OF Der cent
upon the actual cash value of each ahare al
stock and Ii claimed through an aet Of
me General Assembly passed April, 1860
The suit Involves back taxes amounting to
about elC0,O00 and a further amount OF The
annum. 70
The court enIoined State Treasurer
REYNOLDS from proceeding against the First
National Bank, Nothing has been done
aince In the case beyond preparation for
the present argument. The argument Ia
upon the iniunetlon, bur the decision OF the
court will ha upon the merits of the case.
10 opening the case for the bank Mr..
Nields commended that the act Of the Gen.
erai Assembly passed In April, 1869, taxing
national bank shares, dIseriminates be-
tween national bank stock and other In.
vested capital, 10 violation of the provisions
OF an act OF Congress creating national
banks. Congress by enactment allowed
inc State 10 lny a tax upon national bank
shares upon basis similar to the tax laid
upon other moneyed Investments within
the State. The State tax OF one-fourth of l
per eentum singled out national bank
shares for a special tax. The act OF Oon+
greaa requires that the tax be made inclu-
slvo OF all other moneyed property OF the
citizen. Counsel claimed that the Legisla-
tlre must do everything within the restric.
tons allowed by Congress.
Colonel Ntelds explained his theory upon
the tax question by illustrating that IL a
certain person invested $40, 900 10 national
bank shares In this State It will be taxed
one fourth OF per cent. But should he
place It In any other moneyed investment
he would not ba taxed at all, Council con.
sidersd this discrimination which the law
eaye must not be made.
Colonel Nields recited the various iegisla-
,tNo up's petusuu III tnlb Sthto DthIinR upon
the question. He continued his argument
up 20 the time OF recess, at 1 o'clock.
The Rrand Jury was sworn at II O'Clock
and retired for the consideration OF busi-
nesa,
At q O'Clock I'M the afternoon District
Attorney Alexander u. Cooper reported TO
the court three indictments found by the
Grand jury. He was empowered to remit
them to the district court.
Benjamin Nlelds, Esq, resumed argument
Ia the bank tax case. He referred TO the
oontrasted excessive taxation on national
bank shares. He claimed that II a part OF
The burden OF tax had been taken of one
kind OF moneyei interests O similar relief
should be impaired TO national bank share
capital, and II the whole burthen OF tax
alton is taken off moneyed capital 1t should
be inclusive OF national bank shares. Caun.
sci criticised as d sweeping declaration that
the assessors of this State can lawfully col
lect on any stock OF banking company In
corporated by the United States. For State
purposes there has been tax OF 10 cent?
levied upon other banks but rs cents on
national bank shares. Col. Nields consid-
cred the statute Of April, 1869, as imperative
In this connection. 1t has taken away all tax
on other moneyed interests but leaves 1t on
national bank shares as IL stands to-day.
Attorney-general Biggs said that the
phrase "moneyed capital" within the mean.
ing of the act Of Congress Is capital brought
I'm competition with National Bank and al
such capital save tlat Of Saving Fund
eocietles Ia taxed In this State. The statute
OF April 9Th, 1860, of this State, does not tai
| National Banks at a higher rate than thai
levied upon other moneyed corporations II
Delaware.
Mr., Blggs then reviewed tho Legislative
enaotments bearing upon the question. II
showing that national banks were not ex
cessively taxed he gave list Of tho assess
ments paid By tho r., W. n B railroad o.
$4,000; the 3 & D. railroad, SS7 900, and
other roads In proportion. These sums ere
paid by the corporations under the act oi
| 1869 in lieu OF all taxes. He referred also
to the fact OF the legislature passing an on.
aetment authorizing the attorney-general
| to see that taxes due from National Banks
| are paid and empowering tho State treas.
| urer to employ counsel for that purpose.
Lew O. Bird, Esq. said that in his iudg'
ment the case rested entirely upon and Ii
governed solely by the case OF the merean'
| ttis National Bank VI. the city OF New YorH
| decided by the Supreme Court. He con
| tended that there Is no difference In prin,
1 eiple between thetwo cases. 1t became nee
4 essary for tho Supreme Court to construt
| section 52l9 (revl-ed statutes) upon thti
1 subject. The construction OF tho phrase
"moueyed capital" by theSupreme Court o.
| the United Srates was the key to Mr.. Bird:
| argument II was announced by the SUI
/ preme Court by q full bench that mon6yec
| capital meant capital employed In banking
i not In mortgages, nor trust companies, MOI
4 judgments, In railway companies nor IN
/ debts duo by solvent debtors, but money
! Invested In banking He considered thai
/ noneyed CAPITAL under the act OF Congress
! Ia that clags OF capital which comes Into
| active competition with capital invested in
national bank stock.
MIR. Bird added that the Congressional
enactment did not compel the State to
raseind the t8x on National Bank sfooR
| when or because 1t had abolished thetax or
mortgages and other investments. The
/ court adjourned to 10 o'clock yesterday.
4 benjamin Nields, Esq, made the CLOSING
4 argument yesterday morning before Judges
4 McKennan and Wales In the United State'
/ couit In the National Bank tax case
Counsel asserted that there Ia no moneyed
Interest, corporation. bonds, mortgages OF
I moneyed capital taxed in this State bu
| that witch ia now attempted In connection
with the National Banks. Since 1883 &c
moneyed interest here has been taxed. Ht
4 eDnsldereh that the case OF the Mercantile
/ BANK Vi. city 81 New York does not apply
4 N principle here. Justice Mathews lay.
/ down tho definition Of what moneyed
/ canital ia, ue Includes money In
ina hands OF individuals as con
trasted with personal property, b9
money loaned by the Individual Il
nloaeyed capital according to that authority
1 The act states that tho tax on national bsni
shares shall not be greater than that on AM
otllor moneysd capital In tho hands OF in
diyliual c!tlzsns OF the STATE. IL person
hns sI0. 600 invesred IN loans, or for bonds
mortgages, or other Investments II Il
moneyed eapital In his hands according 4
\ Justice Matthew'S. II, however, he should
place his money In q corporation who's
business 10 dealing In bonds, investment
and other moueyed business the shares Q
a, vi, ha tplSas in exchange would b