White Mountain Fur Co. v. Whitefield
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Petition, for the abatement of a tax. Transferred without a ruling from the December term, 1913, of the superior court by Sawyer, J., on an agreed statement of facts. The plaintiff is the owner of a pack of foxes which it is keeping in “expectation that they will increase, and that as they reach maturity they may be killed and their pelts sold for fur.”
Read the full summary
Petition, for the abatement of a tax. Transferred without a ruling from the December term, 1913, of the superior court by Sawyer, J., on an agreed statement of facts. The plaintiff is the owner of a pack of foxes which it is keeping in “expectation that they will increase, and that as they reach maturity they may be killed and their pelts sold for fur.” The plaintiff also intends to “buy and sell live foxes for breeding purposes, in such quantities and at such times as may seem most advantageous to it.” The tax which the plaintiff asks to have abated was assessed on these foxes for the year…
1Opinion of the CourtYoung, J.
The defendants concede that foxes are not taxable as such, but contend that these foxes were taxable as stock in trade, under the provisions of subdivision 6 of section 7, chapter 55, Public Statutes. Stock is broad enough to include all useful animals (9 Cent. Diet. 5955, Stock 22); that is, to include the plaintiff’s foxes, whether kept for sale or for breeding purposes. But while all stock is in a sense stock in trade, that term is usually applied to the stock of merchants and tradesmen. 9 Cent. Diet. 5956. Consequently, if the language the legislature used is to be given its ordinary…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Cain's Coffee Co. v. City of MuskogeeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
- Musgrove a v. Winthrop Parker A.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1931
- Boston & Maine Railroad v. ConcordSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1917