Case Name: The People ex rel. The Town of Plattsburgh, Relator, v. Andrew Williams, as County Treasurer of the County of Clinton, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1899-11
Citations: 29 Misc. 463
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People ex rel. The Town of Plattsburgh, Relator, v. Andrew Williams, as County Treasurer of the County of Clinton, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 29
Pages: 463–464

Head Matter:
The People ex rel. The Town of Plattsburgh, Relator, v. Andrew Williams, as County Treasurer of the County of Clinton, Respondent.
(Supreme Court, Clinton Special Term,
November, 1899.)
Liquor Tax Law — The poor fund of the town of Plattsburgh has no right to the State’s share of excise moneys.
Legislation which provides that all excise money of the town of Plattsburgh be devoted to its poor fund, entitles that fund to receive only the balance of the excise money remaining after deducting therefrom the one-third part thereof appropriated by the Liquor Tax Law of 1896 to State purposes.
Application for a writ of mandamus.
David H. Agnew, for relator.
P. W. Cullinan, for respondent.

Opinion:
Kellogg, J.
Application is made by the relator for a writ of mandamus to compel-the treasurer .of Clinton county to pay over to the town of Plattsburgh the liquor "tax money received from licenses issued in the town of Plattsburgh since May 1, 1899.
This application is based upon the wording of an act passed in 1898 (Chap. 135), to amend an act of 1894 (Chap. 471), relating to the same subject. In 1894 all the excise money paid for licenses in the town of Plattsburgh went to the treasurer of the board of alms, as a poor fund. The amendment follows in this respect the wording of the old law disregarding the provisions of the Liquor Tax Law, chapter 112, of the Laws of 1896, by which one-third of such money was to be paid by the county treasurer to the State.
I cannot think that the Legislature intended this amendment of 1898 to divert from the State Treasury, that one third, while all other towns in the State must contribute one-third for State purposes. This would be such a discrimination in favor of the town of Plattsburgh as to excite grave question as to its cause. There appears to have been some blundering in the use of words in the amendatory act. The fair, and I think the proper construction, must confine the meaning of this amendment to such money as the State does not, by the Liquor Tax Law, appropriate to itself for •State purposes.
The application is, therefore, denied, but without costs.
Application denied, without costs.