The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1917-04-05

therefore, which discriminates in the
matter Of the amount Of an inherit
ance tax between a citizen and resi-
dent of Norway and citizen or
Norway residing in California or any
other state of the Union, Is not for
that reason void on the ground of
class legislation.
8. Article of the Treaty Of Amity
and Commerce between the United
States and the kingdom Of Norway
| is only applicable to the estates of
decedents who were citizens Of Nor
way leaving property in the United
States and citizens Of the United
and those inheriting from them, and
lis not applicable to the estates Of de-
cedents who were citizens Of the
United States. s.... .
9. The term "droit de detraction"
means q tax which is levied on the
right of removal Of property from one
state to another and does not include
an inheritance tax, which is merely
tax upon the right to devise and to in
herit.
10. The general rule. that treaties
should be literally construed so as to
carry out the apparent intention OF
the parties to secure equality and
reciprocity between them,a does not
justify a state court in Judicially
legislating as against the right of the
state and its taxing power. and in
make it applicable to the estate of
citizens Of the United States in the
United States when by its terms 1t Is
only applicable to the estates of
aliens or to the estates of citizens OF
the United States who reside-in for
|eign country. .s.(. e. s,
Appeal from an order and Judgment
OF the district court Of Cass county
reversing an order OF the county
heritance tax. Pollock, ]. r..
Intervenor' appeals.
Reversed. DO 80
Opinion of the court by Bruce. C. j.
Robinson, j., dissenting. sss
Birdzell, J., being disqualified. did
not participate and Hon. A. g. Burr,
judge of the Ninth judicial district,
sat in his place.
George e. Wallace and r. e. Pack
ard, Bismarck. attorneys for inter-
venor and appellant.
Fowler & Green, Fargo, attorneys
for respondents.
From 5urIeish County.
Fred Bismarck Strauss. plaintiff
and appellant. VS.. the State Of North
Dakota, and the County Of Burleigh,
Syllabus:
1. The clauses of Section S97 of the
Compiled Laws Of 1913, which provide
for a larger Inheritance tax or charge
upon the property devised to or in
herited by a nephew or niece than
upon the property devised to or In
herited by cousin or uncle or aunt,
are not in violation Of the Fourteenth
amendment to the federal constitu-
ton, nor of Section SO of the consti-
tuition Of North Dakota, which pro-
vides that "The legislative assembly
shall not pass local or special laws for
the assessment or collection Of taxes,
nor of Section 20 Of the constitution
OF North Dakota, which provides that
TN all other cases where a general
law can be applicable, no special law
shall be enacted"
Mandamus to compel the allowance
OF a final report of an executor with
out paying the inheritance tax pro-
vided for by the statute.
Appeal from the district court OF
Burleigh county. w. L. Nuessle, ].
Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff
appeals.
Affirmed.
Opinion of the court by Bruce, On. ].
Robinson, j., dissenting.
Birdzell, being disqualified, did not
F. q. McCurdy, Bismarck, attorney
for plaintiff and appellant.
William LANCER attorney general;
Fl. A. Bronson and Dan V. Brennan,
assistants attorney general. and
George e. Wallace and II. r. Berndt,
attorneys for defendants
and respondents.