The Bourbon news. [volume] (Paris, Ky.) 1895-19??, 1907-11-26
State Wins Important Bank Cases

The Court of Appeals handed down a
decision In the case of State Auditor s.
w. Hager against the Citizens
National Bank, of Lebanon. and the
First National Bank, of Lexington. in
which it upheld the act of 1906.
This decision is one of the most i'm
portant handed down by the Appellate
Court in years, as it affects every
national bank in the State, holding. as
it does, that the Government bonds
owned by the national banks are sub
ject to valuation and assessment by
the State Board of Valuation and AS
seSsment. The case was first tried in
the State Fiscal Court and the act of
1906 declared unconstitutional. and was
carried TO the Court of Appeals by
Auditor Hager. For years the Audit
ors of the State of Kentucky have
sought to collect taxes on the Govern
ment bonds owned by the national
banks, but the decision of the court
Friday is the first on record in favor
of the contention of the State. The
FirStNatiOnal Bank of Paris has now a
suit pending against the city of Paris
along same issues, in which this de-
cision practically does away with.
The decision of the court is in mart
as follows:
{ 1.-The fiscal year for 1906 did not ex-
pire until June 80, 1906, and clearly
the Board of Valuation and Assess
ment had the power at any time within
the hscal year to make an assessment
for that year.
The law under which the assess
ments were made was in every SUBJ
stantlal particular Identical with the
precedlngila of 1904 If the assess
ment had been made under it the
shares OF appellee would have been
assessed at precisely the same sum at
which they were assessed. The argu-
ment that If its shares had beeo
assessed under the act of 1904 and the
capital of State bank and trust COM
panies under the act of 1902, it would
have to deduct the value of United
States bonds owned, and hence was
prejudicial by the failure to assess
under that law, does not impress us
either favorably or forcibly. Why
should 1t have been entitled to this ex-
emptlon! Certainly not on account of
anything In the act of 1904, but be-
cause of discrimination in the act of
1902, under which State banks were
assessed; and when this was removed
the technical right of national banks
to exemption cased to exist, and it was
removed when the act discriminating,
IN favor of State tanks was repealed,
and their shares were assessed under
an act applying equally and alike to
all banks.
ut was not the intention of the
| National Banking Act, nor has it been
the purpose of the Supreme Court, as
we understand its opinion, to allow
national banks any advantage over
other moneyed capital or to permit any
discrimination in their favor as against
other banking institutions. Keeping
in mind this proposition and the undis-
puted fact that the shares of State
bank and trust companies and
national banks have been taxed under
the same law and precisely alike, there
is no merit in the contention of the
| appellee banks. Their effort to escape
a just and fair share of taxation by
attempting to so construe the law
and the act of the Board of Valuation
and Assessment as to make it appear
that they, or their shareholders were
or might have been Disseminated
against, when, in fact, they were not.
or could not have been, will not be
sanctioned. The opinion of the court
was written by Judge Carroll. with a
/ dissenting opinion by Chief Justice
O'Rear and Judges Lassing and
Barker.