Court Opinion

ID: 8329797
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-10-17 20:43:21.856573+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:45:25.741986
License: Public Domain

Cullen, J.
I think that on the conceded facts, the relator had justly subject to taxation. He *149had the right to buy governments to avoid taxation, or borrow money upon them for like purpose. But I know of no authority for the claim of the relator that money borrowed on governments is not hable to taxation. The authorities he cites for the purpose give countenance to no such doctrine. The money once borrowed is the absolute property of the borrower, and there is no law exempting money from taxation. The relator testifies that of the money so borrowed, he loaned a portion, the other he invested in his business. He testifies that he has lost none, therefore it was all in his possession, and he should have been assessed for it. The account should be made as follows:
Money loaned............................... $25,000 00
Money invested in business................... 20,000 00
Stock taxable....................... 30,000 00
Schooner................. 2,500 00
Other personal property........... 4,000 00
$81,500 00
Indebtedness on governments...... $45,000 00
Indebtedness on stock............. 30,000 00 15,000 00
Balance.............. $6,500 00
For this balance the relator should have been assessed. The judgment appealed from vacating the assessment should be reversed, and the assessment reduced to $6,500.