The herald., 1893-01-21

nlOlteuI from imposing taxes upon cOun-
ties, cities aod towns, or other munich
pal corporations for municipal purposes.
must therefore follow that in author
izing freeholders' charters, which the
legislature cannot change or amend, the
power of taxation being essential to mu-
nicipal existence, that power is neces-
ssrily implied. The court therefore
holds that the city had the right to levy
and collect taxes"
Upon the sarond point raised, that
appellant was entitled to deduct from its
solvent unsecured credits its unsecured
lahia.sy to it's depositors for moneys de-
pos sSd, the court Gays that eeveral con-
sideratons are urged. 1t is insisted
that if the charter vests the power to
levy taxes such power must be exercised
strictly in accordance with the ordi-
nances of the clty, aud that the ordi-
nance upon the subject of taxation pro-
vides that the taxpayer may deduct
from his solvent up ieculed credits his
unsecured debts owing to bona fide resi-
dents of the state, and that appellant
was therefore entitled to the reduction
claimed.
The court cannot perceive that there
is any conflict between the charter and
ordinance and the provisions of the
code, but if euch conflict existed it
would be bound to hold that section
36l7, political code, declares and was in
tended to declare tie general policy
of the state upon the subject OF
the taxation of savings and loan cor
porations and was therefore general
law in the broadcast sense of the term,
and as such would control.
1t was contended that the appellant
does not come within the provisions of
section 36l7, because the debts in ques-
tien are not ordinary deposits of savings
banks, but debts for borrowed money
repayable in the exact sum borrowed,
with interest thereon, irrespective of
the prr.dts or losses that may accrue to
the oank. The court holds, however,
that the language OF the section is COM
prehensive enough to include both
classes. The opinion concludes as fol-
lows:
"As savings banks are prohibited from
loanlDg the money OF depositors except
on adequate security, upon real or
personal property, we must assume that
the solvent unsecured credits reported
by appellant were loans of its capital or
profits upon personal security, and if its
contention in this case should be carried
out, savings banks, with capital paid
in by its stockholders, could ALWAYS
evade taxation upon it's entire capital
80 long as its savings deposits equaled
or exceeded its capital, by converting
its capital into unsecured credits. We
think the demurrer to the complaint
was properly sustained, and advise that
the judgment be affirmed"
The opinions on the other two cases
were es follows:
The Main-street Savings Bank and
Trust company, appellant, VS.. j. w.
Hinton, city assessor of the citv OF Los
Angeles, respondent. No. IA 87S.
This action was brought by appellant
to recover from the defendant the sum
of $l075.59, the tax assessed, and col
lected by seizure, upon it's solvent and
unsecured credits. demurrer was in
terposed to the complaint, which was
sustained, and iudgmentrendered there
on for defendant and plaintiff appeals.
The cause is submitted upon the briefs
| fled in No. 14,S77, (Security Savings
Band and Trust company vs. Hlnton),
the same defendant, this day filed, and
involves the same questions, and an
additional one, which we shall briefly
notice.
1t is claimed. in this case, that appel
liant doee a general banking business, as
well as that of q, savings bank. We do
not see that this fsct materially affects
any question decided IN No. 14,S77, or
tho correctness of the Judgment rem
dered in this case by the superior court,
Fl So far as it's general banking business
is concerned appellant is subject to the
same law as regards taxation as other
hor l-or nt a a h II oil
ness, and as to that part of its bueiness
done as a savings bank, it is subject to
the same law that applies to other cav
ipgs banks. There should be no
difficulty in separating its ordinary
deposits from its savings deposits,
though none is found in its state
ment to the assessor, or in the
| complaint in this action. In paragraph
20 of the complaint, it is alleged that
the unsecured debts due from appellant
to bona fide residents of this state were
debts due depositors for sums borrowed
from them upon interests;" and that
being true, no distinction can be made
between this case and that of the Secu-
rity Savings bank, No. 14,S77, and the
judgment should therefore be affirmed.
HAYNES, @.
We concur: BELcHER, @.
FooTE, O.
For the reasons given in the following
opinion the judgment is affirmed.
HARRISON, j.
| PATERSON, j.
GARoUTTE, j.
Los Angeles Savings bank, appellant,
vs.. j. w. Hinton, city assessor of the
city of Los Angeles, respondent. No. H..
$40.
The facts in this case are the same
except as to amounts as in the case ol
Security Savings bank VS.. Hinton, No
1887, this day filed, /, add the complaint,
demurrer and Judgment were the same.
The appeal is from the judgment and il
suhmitted upon the same briefs. On
authority of that case the judgment
should be affirmed. HAYNES, @.
We concur: BELoHER, @.
FooTE, @.
For the reasons given in the case oi
Security Savings bank vs. Hinton, No
l4,S77, this day filed, the Judgment is
affirmed. HARRISON, j.
PATERSON, J..
GARUUTTE, j.
In the case of Edward Hatton, appel
liant, We. A. G. Holmes ct al. respond
ents, the court in quite long opinion
atfirms the judgment of the lower court
The court granted nonsuit, from which
| ;.,Ir > h, 70