Legal Opinion

Allegheny v. Shoenberger

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 3, 1853PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Error, to the judgment of the District Court of Allegheny eotmty upon the following stated case: “It is admitted that the defendant, Shoenberger, owned and held during the whole of the year 1852, the sum of $43,000 of the capital stock of the Exchange Bank: that the Commissioners of said county, during the year 1852, assessed against said defendant, a tax of three and one-half mills on the $43,000 of stock so owned and held by said.defendant, for county purposes; the said…

Read the full summary

Error, to the judgment of the District Court of Allegheny eotmty upon the following stated case: “It is admitted that the defendant, Shoenberger, owned and held during the whole of the year 1852, the sum of $43,000 of the capital stock of the Exchange Bank: that the Commissioners of said county, during the year 1852, assessed against said defendant, a tax of three and one-half mills on the $43,000 of stock so owned and held by said.defendant, for county purposes; the said plaintiff claiming, and the said defendant denying, that said tax is legal, and that said defendant is liable to pay the…

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered

by Lowrie, J.

— The question here is, are shares of bank stock *36subject to taxation for county purposes ? Ey the tax law of 1844, sec. 32, “ shares of stock in any bank” are made taxable for “state and county purposes,” and sec. 33, prescribes the measure of the state tax and the mode of collecting it. But all this was changed by the law of 1850, regulating banks. By sec. 21, the tax on dividends is considerably increased, and by sec. 46, a direct tax is added on the stock itself, with a proviso that the stock shall not be subject to taxation for any other…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Boyer v. BoyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
  2. Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Ass'n v. SandersSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1903
  3. Ruckelschaus v. OehmeNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1891
  4. Den ex dem. Mackey v. MackeySussex County Superior Court · 1807
  5. Mintzer v. County of MontgomerySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1867

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API