Haight v. Railroad Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
Error to the Circuit Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania; the case, as derived from the statement of it by the learned judge below (McCandless, J.), who sat for the Circuit Court, having been thus: The 122d section of the internal revenue act of 1864, provides that “any railroad company indebted for any money for which bonds have been issued upon which interest is payable shall be subject to and pay a duty of five per cent, on the amount of all such interest…
Read the full summary
Error to the Circuit Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania; the case, as derived from the statement of it by the learned judge below (McCandless, J.), who sat for the Circuit Court, having been thus: The 122d section of the internal revenue act of 1864, provides that “any railroad company indebted for any money for which bonds have been issued upon which interest is payable shall be subject to and pay a duty of five per cent, on the amount of all such interest whenever the same shall be payable, and said company are authorized to deduct and withhold from all payments on account of…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Grier
The facts in this case are properly stated and the law correctly decided by the learned judge of the Circuit Court.
The provision in the condition of defeasance of the mortgage, has reference only to covenants between mortgagor and mortgagee, and is usual in every mortgage; being put there in order to secure the mortgagee, who may not be in possession, from demand for taxes incurred while the mortgagor was in possession. It can have no possible application to the income tax of bondholders. The 122d section of the revenue act of 1864, was enacted for greater facility of collection of the tax.…
2Cited by12 opinions
- State v. Standard Oil Co. of LouisianaSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1937
- National Safe Deposit Co. v. SteadIllinois Supreme Court · 1911
- Street Railroad Co. v. MorrowTennessee Supreme Court · 1889
- Nolte v. Hudson Nav. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1925
- New Haven Water Co. v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.