Case Name: The People of the State of New York ex rel. New England Dressed Meat and Wool Company, Relator, v. James A. Roberts, as Comptroller of the State of New York, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1897-09
Citations: 20 A.D. 521
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York ex rel. New England Dressed Meat and Wool Company, Relator, v. James A. Roberts, as Comptroller of the State of New York, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 20
Pages: 521–522

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York ex rel. New England Dressed Meat and Wool Company, Relator, v. James A. Roberts, as Comptroller of the State of New York, Respondent.
Taxation—a fweign corporation slaughtering sheep and selling the flesh and converting the residue into mairhetable products is- a manufacturing corporation.
A foreign corporation, whose entire capital employed within the State of New York is used in buying sheep, converting them, into mutton, refrigerating the mutton by such processes as improve its quality and preserve it, transporting and selling it, and also in converting other parts of the sheep into marketable products, is engaged in manufacture within the State of New York, and is, therefore, not subject to a tax upon its. capital stock under chapter 543 of the ' Laws of 1880, and the various acts amendatory thereof.
.Certiorari issued out of the Supreme Court and attested on the . 25th day of May, 1897, directed to James A. Roberts, as Comptrol-. ler of the State of Hew York, commanding him to certify and return to the office of the clerk of the county of Albany all and singular-his proceedings in relation to imposing a tax, under chapter 542 of the Laws of 1880,. and' the acts amendatory thereof, upon the capital stock of the relator, a corporation organized Under the. laws of the State of Maine, and engaged in business in the State of New York. •’■ '. '• ;*
James W. Eaton, for the relator.
T. E. Hancock, Attorney-General, and G. D. B. Hasbrouck, Deputy Attorney-General, for the respondent.

Opinion:
Landon, J,:
. -We think the return of the Comptroller and the evidence accompanying it show that the relator was exempt from the tax- imposed, •for .the-reason thatjall- of its capital actually employed in this State during the period for which the tax was imposed, namely, for the three years ending .October 31, 1896, was employed in manufacturing within this State, and in the sale therein, of the product of' such manufacturing, - !'"'' '.
The -business of the relator in this State consisted of buying within . the State sheep andllambs, slaughtering them and converting the carcasses into mutton, and refrigerating the same by such processes as improve the quality thereof and preserve the same. f.or a considerable
length-of time. from natural decay, employing for. -the' purpose a carefully devised refrigerating plant and such-appliances as insured with great , certainty, the results desired, and then the transportation of-such mutton in-refrigerator cars, and .its sale; also, the converting the other parts, of jfche sheep into" tallow, ammonia, fertilizer and other marketable products. "
"The Comptroller,¡as we understand the return, held that the production of the mutton, as above stated, was not. a manufacturej and hence, he imposed the tax. Within the principle of The People ex rel. Standard Wood Co. v. Roberts (ante, p. 514), herewith decided, • we reverse, with fifty dollars costs and disbursements, the determination of 'the. Comptroller imposing the tax. " *
All -concurred.
Determination of j the- Comptroller reversed, - with fifty dollars costs and disbursements. '