Spirit of Jefferson. [volume] (Charles Town, Va. [W. Va.]) 1844-1948, 1906-12-11
Communicated.
"a Sound and Fury Signifying
Nothing

"a Sound and Fury Signifyini
Nothing
Mr.. EDIToR LIN the issue of Novem
Der goth. of the Free Press. there is al
editorial on The National Citiz en-
Bank Assessment" In the course o
the comments under the above heading
the Free Press says I'VE do not meal
to allege any dishonest motive in thu
members of the Court who voted to hav,
the bank stock released from the pay
ment of taxes. but the public will proba
bly, place that construction on it," WI
do not believe that when the facts ant
the law are placed before the public any
construction criticising the Court vii
| follow.
Further quoting from the editorial
"The County Court on Monday by q
vote of to released the National Citi
zens Bank of this place, from taxation on
its capital stock, which is invested in
government bonds" If the Court had
done this, it would have been clearly
right. as the Supreme Court of the State
in Old National Bank VS.. the County
Court of Berkeley county reported in S.
w. Va, case first decided bv Judge
Daley and afterwards affirmed by the
Supreme Court, decided that you could
not tax the government bonds OF Ma
tional Bank.
The Legislature attempting to prevent
the exemption OF government bonds by
National Banks or other Banks from tax
alton passed certain legislation attempt
ing to tax shareholders. and it was this
legislation that the County Court passed
upon.
The question before the County Court
was not the taxation of the Bank, but of
the shareholders thereof under the re-
cent legislation OF the Legislature of w.
Va. The members of the Court who vo.
ted to relieve the shareholders had paid
their taxes on their shares prior to the
decision of the Court. and were, there
fore technically not interested in the de-
cision. The Acts of W. Va. 1905, Chap
ter IS. Section 10, alter providing for
taxation of the shares of stock in Bank
Trust Company or National Banking
Association. provides Notwithstanding
anything herein before provided for. any
such Bank, Company or Association
may have its capital stock assessed and
may pay taxes thereon as hereinafter
provided and, in that case, the shares of
its capital stock shall not be assessed for
taxation" There was no dispute about
the fact that the Bank had elected to be
taxed under this notwithstanding"
clause and, unless the Court disregarded
this law entirely. there could have been
no other decision by the Court than that
the shareholder should not be taxed
THE Legislature OF each State may de-
termine and direct the manner and place
for taxing all the shares of a National
Banking Association located within the
State, subject only to two restrictions,
that the taxation shall not be at greater
rate than is assessed upon other money
ed capital in the hands of individual cit
liens of such States, and that the shares
of any National Banking Association
owned by non-residents of any State.
shall be taxed in the city or town where
the bank is located and not elsewhere. ;"
Rev. st, U. S. Sec. saIo. The Legisla-
ture had spoken. and what was the
Court to do but carry out the law. which
had never been declared unconstitution-
al or null and void by any Court of the
State,
The Court certified the following furth-
er fact upon which it granted said relief:
The assessor in taxing the State Banks
of said district allowed them to deduct
their non-taxable securities. in fixing a
basis upon which they or their sharehol-
ders should be taxed. but refused to al
low the National Citizens Bank to de-
duct their United States bonds, non
taxable security. in fixing basis for the
taxation for it or the shareholders thereof,
thus. discriminating in faver of the State
Banks and violating the laws of the Uni
ted States in such cases made and pro-
vided." The Court recommends that the
assessor make out an assessment against
the National Citizens Bank as provided
in 10Th Section. Chapter IS, Acts 1905.
allowing them to deduct their non taxa.
BILE securities in the form of government
bonds or other form, as he did in the
case of the State Banks in said district.
If there be any criticism. Mr.. Editor,
let it be made upon the law and not upon
the Court for carrying out the law.
Now. under these circumstances, what
was the Court to do? Should they re-
fuse to sit in the case. in which event,
there would have been no quorum and
no Court to appeal to for the correction
of this erroneous assessment, but having
rightly decided to sit in the case and
thus constitute Court, should they have
decided the case against the other stock
holders OF the Bank against the plain
provisions of the law. thus violating
their oaths?
The State has given notice to appeal
the case, and if any error has been done
in constituting the law. It can be correct
ed in the higher Court. The direct let