Case Name: JULIUS CATLIN, Jr., and Others, Executors, etc., of STEPHEN M. BUCKINGHAM, Deceased, Plaintiffs, v. THE TRUSTEES OF TRINITY COLLEGE and Others, Defendants
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1888-06
Citations: 56 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 278
Docket Number: 
Parties: JULIUS CATLIN, Jr., and Others, Executors, etc., of STEPHEN M. BUCKINGHAM, Deceased, Plaintiffs, v. THE TRUSTEES OF TRINITY COLLEGE and Others, Defendants.
Judges: Pratt, J., concurred.
Reporter: Supreme Court Reports (Hun)
Volume: 56
Pages: 278–282

Head Matter:
JULIUS CATLIN, Jr., and Others, Executors, etc., of STEPHEN M. BUCKINGHAM, Deceased, Plaintiffs, v. THE TRUSTEES OF TRINITY COLLEGE and Others, Defendants.
Bxemption from, collateral inheritance tax — churches, missiona/ry societies and colleges not exempt.
A church is not a corporation'1 exempt by lawfrom taxation’’within themeaning of those words as used in the statutes imposing the collateral inheritance tax, as by the provisions of the Revised Statutes the buildings for public worship and the several lots where such buildings are situated, and the furniture belonging to each of them, is alone exempt from taxation.
The provision exempting stocks owned by the State or by literary or charitable institutions does not apply to such corjiorations, nor do the provisions of the statute exempting the personal estate of every incorporated company not made liable to taxation on its capital stock in the fourth title of this chapter. (Dykman, J., dissenting.)
Missionary societies are not exempt from the tax imposed by such collateral inheritance tax laws. (Dykman, J .dissenting.)
Although a college corporation, created under the laws of the State of Connecticut, is, by the terms of its charter, exempt from taxation, yet, as the laws in Connecticut have no extra-territorial force, they do not exempt such corporation from taxation under the collateral inheritance tax law of this State. (Dykman, J., dissenting.)
Case submitted without action upon an agreed statement of facts. In December, 1887, Stephen M. Buckingham, a resident of the city of Poughkeepsie, Dutchess county, New York, died, leaving a will by which, among other things, he bequeathed a legacy of $50,000 to Trinity College at Hartford, Connecticut; to the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society of the Protestant Episcopal Church, the sum of $20,000; to the rectors, wardens and vestrymen of St. Paul’s Protestant Episcopal Church in the city of Poughkeepsie, the sum of $10,000. The question submitted for the consideration of the court was whether the legacies above mentioned were subject to the collateral inheritance tax imposed by chapter 483 of the Laws of 1885, as amended by chapter 713 of the Laws of 1887. ,
Wilkmson <& Gossvm, for the plaintiffs.
L. A. Lochwood, for trustees of Trinity College, defendant.
Ma/rtin Heermcmee, for St. Paul’s Protestant Episcopal Church in Poughkeepsie, defendant.
O. D. M. Baker, for county treasurer, defendant.

Opinion:
Barnabd, P. J.:
By the first section of chapter 713, Laws of 1887, a tax of five per cent is imposed upon collateral inheritances. The defendant, St. Paul's Church, is a religious corporation. A legacy is given to tt. Another defendant, Trinity College, is an institution of learning, chartered under the laws of Connecticut. Another defendant is a missionary society, incorporated under the laws of this State. Are these three corporations to take the legacy free of the collateral tax ? The words of the collateral tax law cover all bequests and legacies " other than to or the societies, corporations and institutions now exempted by law from taxation." As to the church the Revised Statutes only exempts "every building for public worship and the several lots whereon such buildings are situated, and the furniture belonging to each of them." (2 R. S. [Banks' 7th ed.], 982, § 4.) The church does not fall within the exemption of subdivision 6 of that section — " all stocks owned by the State or by literary or charitable institutions'." The case shows no stock owned by the church. The section applies only to stock in State corporations and upon this stock the corporations were made to pay the tax to the State and to the literary and charitable institutions. (Laws of 1845, chap. 195.) The church is not exempted under subdivision 7 of section 4 of the Revised Statutes (supra). " The personal estate of every incorporated company not made liable to taxation on its capital in the fourth title of this chapter." The fourth title, as it stood when that fourth section was drawn, contained provisions for the taxation of corporations upon their capital. If the corporation made no profit, it was exempt. (1 R. S. [2d ed.] 404, § 9); some corporations could commute (§ 11); and some were exempted unless an income of five per cent was made. (§12.) Sections 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14, were repealed by chapter 456, 1857 and 654, Laws of 1853, but the title still stands as one affecting corporations, liable because they derive an income upon capital or otherwise. The exemption in subdivision 7 only applied to the personal property of corporations which paid a tax on its stock, which was intended to include all its personal property. Churches were not included. The defendant church has, therefore, no exemption from the tax.
The same conclusion must be reached in the case of the missionary society. There is no law exempting them as missionary societies; and the law, subdivisions 6 and 7 of section 4 above, gave them no exemption from a tax upon personal property outside of stocks held in State corporations.
The case of Trinity College is different in this. It is a foreign corporation, but is exempt from taxation by its charter. The charter of Connecticut has no extra-territorial force. The collateral inheritance tax must be construed with respect to the State laws giving-exemption from taxation. All corporations not exempted by law from taxation m June, 1887, is the test of exemption from the collateral inheritance tax.
The defendant, Trinity College, does not come within the description. The legacies should, therefore, all be held subject to the tax of five per cent.
Pratt, J., concurred.