*1 Sаvings Bank States. Syllabus. This act is confined to controversies between citizens of States, different power the Circuit given Court The appellate. jurisdiction involves same principle, and rests the same foundation with that conferred by section of the twenty-fifth Act of The Judiciary of that has been constitutionality provision sus uniformly tained the unanimous of this court, by judgment whenever has been subject presented adjudication. twelfth 1789, section of and the third section of the act of March, the 2d of to revenue relating officers, present the same We are not aware quеstion. that a doubt of the of either has ever been validity expressed Federal by any court. The is now acquiescence universal. The subject examined in Martin v. elaborately Hunter.*
The seventh amendment to the Constitution, touching in the re-examination courts of the United States of facts which have been tried has no by jury, application case, because the first had been judgment vacated, the first aside, set verdict and a hew trial as before granted, stated, when the cause was removed to the Circuit Court. of affirmance the District judgment Court and the affirmed arе reversed, and the District Court and Court of Common Pleas will be directed
Proceed no further suit. Savings v. Bank United The Dollar States. subjects Internal Revenue Act of 1866 to the The ninth cent, sum five laid on the undistributed or sums made tux funds, year banks and during the their added sums, sum or when made generally, institutions and added capital banks without stockholders or funds even to such receiving deposits do to be stock, the business lent in- and which depositors. of their sole benefit vested * Wheaton, 333; Mayor Cooper, Wallace, see also The
Statement of the case. proviso 2. A construction of a to аn act which re- proviso plainly makes the pugnant body is inadmissible. 3. The given construction Internal Revenue commissioners Act *2 revenue, though of internal even in published an Internal Revenue Record, of so of dignity is not a much that a re-enactment construction having pub- subsequent the statute construction been made and lished, ; regarded legislative is to be as a of that adoption construction proviso the construction made to an act especially repugnant not when of the act. body By prohibited the Internal Revenue law the United States 4. any remedy the action of debt or other common-law for col- adopting general to them. This true'on lecting principles. what due “ ] July 3th, 1866, Revenue Act of may the Internal taxes be sued Under in of the name the United Slutes in proper for and recovered form of action.” sum, pay statute on all banks to of requirement a certain The cent., during year all undistributed made or added on per funds, banks, contingent charge is a of a sum to their certain makes the banks a debtor for prescribed. assessment the sum and without to the Circuit Court for the Western of Error District Pennsylvania. an action of debt States United brought against Bank, in the court below, to recover certain Savings
Dollar which the taxes, revenue declaration internal alleged These taxes were from it to asserted due government. authorized amendment contained to have of the Internal Revenue'Act 13th, July ninth Act, of a Revenue prior 1866,* part Internal w.as 30th, 1864, June namely, repealed, place enacted: thereof centum, levied and collected shall be atax there per “That office or money declared scrip due, dividends wher- all thereafter same bo whеnever the shall payable, stockholders, ever or or parties depositors, whatsoever, . . . as part
policy-holders, income, or gains any bank, earnings, company, trust of savings . institution, . . insurance ... company Territories,... or and on States all undistributed or added sums made to their during year or sums, banks, said trust funds; companies, Large, Stat. Statement of the ease. tax, institutions, and insurance 6hall the said companies and are authorized to deduct and from pay- withhold all hereby ments made on account.of dividends'or sums of money due aforesaid, be may’ as the said tax five pay’uble centum. And a list or return shall made and rendered assessor,... on or before the tenth the month day following in which dividends or sums of or- any’ become due money as aforesaid; and list or payable said return shall contain a faithful true and account as aforesaid; amount taxes there thereto a declaration of annexed the presi- cashier, dent, bank, trust treasurer company, savings institution, or under or affirmation, insurance oath company’, and manner as commissioner in- prescribed form revenue, true ternal that the same contains a and faithful account And for aforesaid. default any’ taxes making return, with such list such declaration an- rendering nexed, ¿nce bank, institution, trust or insur- company, *3 shall as such default forfeit a the
company making penalty §1000; of in case of default in sum and or render- any’ making return, or or of list default said of payment the tax ing thereof, or the assessment and (cid:127)as required, collection part be in the tax and accordancewith the penalty generalprovisions law othercases and neglect refusal. “ Provided, the tax That dividends life insurance upon be until shall not deemed due such dividends are companies nor shall the returned portion mutual premiums by payable; to their nor life insurance policy-holders, annual companies allowed interest or paid depositors semi-annual be considered institutions, as dividends.” was that The view act a government required cent, collected, be levied tax of live to amongst year sums added the Dollar by during things, Savings to its Bank, the defendant case, to bank, without the character of the na- or the regard of that ture and fund. purpose above reader has quoted, observed, a
contains each bank shall make certain requirement .a “in return, form and manner as prescribed commissioner of internal that the revenue, same contains Ct Savings of the case.
Statement and faithful taxes aforesaid.” true account ap in this case that after the of the act in ques peared passage Rollins, then commissioner reve tion, Mr. of internal made, 1867, it, construction of so far as nue, February, affected banks of the character of the one now sued, it a tax held amounts required which were added to their retained funds instead of being their of course no re divided among depositors, was frоm such a relating subjects turn required bank.* ’of
This action Commissioner Rollins was repeated successor, Delano, his in 1870;† Commissioner and it was reaffirmed Commissioner repeated by Pleasanton, 1871.‡ Bank,
The Dollar had seemed, Savings accordingly no either of made return mentioned in years during declaration, to do so commis- being of internal revenue. sioner the successor
In of Commissioner Pleasan- year a different construction of the act, ton and this adopted action recover taxes which the declara- brought should have been June, 1866, between paid tion alleged 1870, inclusive; and these December, taxes, thus alleged formed the this suit. due, subject-matter jury found verdict: special
“We find that the Dollar Bank is a institu- banking the laws the State of Pennsylvania, created without tion stock, the business of receiv- doing stockholders capital or invested for loaned the sole benefit ing deposits *4 that the charter authorizes the retention of con- depositors; fund, from the to the accumulated of earnings, extent tingent of its its deposits security depositors; ten centum per for of added to said earned and that contingent 1866, sum, Decеmber, from 13th 31st July, undistributed cent, of on $107,000 tax five earnings having (the 13th that July, carried earnings 1866); prior paid undistributed said semi- added to and fund * 11 Record, Id. 73. Id. Internal Revenue ‡ † United
Argument against the tax. on the first in each annually, days July January year. find, And vve if the court should be of on state this opinion, facts, that the recover, entitled to a verdict for plaintiff United States §5356, added, for the sum if to which to be the court should be of that is entitled to interest opinion plaintiff taxes, the semi-annual from the time were due and they pay- able, the further sum §1100; if but, the court should be of opinion, entitled to recover on the sаid facts under the found, law, then that we find plaintiff for the de- is not fendant.”
The court rendered a in favor of the for the States sum of principal $5356, suit, with costs of writ was of error taken.* errors The were: assigned that the act of
1st. authorized the 'Holding Congress levy and collection tax.
2d. action debt was maintainable Holding the tax. recovery No was made in the court below as to question whether form of nor proper action, any question except as to the bank to the tax. liability pay jB. Curtis, JR.
Mr. error: plaintiff act does not authorize the and collection Congress levy the tax in upon the question defendant. decisions the commissioners, Rollins.and Pleasan- ton, were seem to correct. have been founded They law, this view of the intended to tax the net Congress of certain institutions named, earnings banking whether those net should be distributed dividends, stockholders form retained and added those and that cases in which to the capital; to tax the distributed did not intend did earnings, the undistributed intend and as it is ex- earnings; interest, no it was gave because admitted the savings The court default, and that its refusal reprehensibly bank wa6 not the tax by the inconsistent action and сonflicting was induced opinions of the Department. Revenue Internal
232 States. v. against the
Argument tax. declared in the to law, sums pressly paid depositors within banks are not to be deemed dividends sums should the of that word in the neither law, meaning which the omitted to bank has to depositors, lawfully and has held not as an undistributed, addition the capital no but stock banks capital stock), only (such having taxable of its be deemed future, security depositors as such surplus. this connection, that, to note while important the commissioners what returns should prescribe
power was in force, made banks full and while by savings the commissioners on the law was construction placed by the act of known passed by public promulgation, Congress section used substan 1870,* and fifteenth July 14th, now in the same subject tially concerning language case, as was contained the act of 1866. question the commissioner therefore, stands thus: Congress required should This what returns make. prescribe construction on the him law. put required necessarily held did not to return so, required He held undistributed for the of these the sums solely security had After this made construction practical depositors. re-enacted the actеd on for four years, Congress nearly was reduced in the same words amouut) (though received this construction. which had practical that the re-enactment rule, It is a settled of a statute which had received construction in effect judicial adopts And that construction. same why apply principle construction put contemporaneous practical to construe it? an officer act by expressly † action debtwas maintainable recovery 2. An taxes question. an action at the common This was law. The United but the no common law;‡ thirty-fourth States Aсt the laws of the several Judiciary provides Large, Stat. Wheaton, Darby, Lessee Edwards’s † Peters, Peters, Wheaton ‡ Sayings Bank
Argument against the tax. slial States 1be the rules decision in the trial of actions *6 at the common law.
Now, law of as also of other Pennsylvania, many States, 1789, as it existed in an action will not of debt lie to recover a tax authorized to be levied collected aby statute, which statute affords a for its remedy assessment and collection.* all the decisions that principle is, where statute creates a aud right, provides particular which that be vindicated, no rеmedy right other that than afforded can statute be used. remedy will no such action lie under the Especially statute in because it question; expressly provides, “In case of default said any making list or rendering return, or of of the any required, default tax as payment thereof, any part assessment collection of the tax be in accordance with the penalty general provisions law in cases neglect refusal.”
Those other here referred provisions to are found in the 13th, act of July require assessor to They 1866.† make lists; out what the lists are they point contаin; au at time thorize him within months any from the time fifteen of the or from the time of the passage delivery collector, to make of the list to additional special lists; these lists to be delivered general special himby his collector, warrant for the stand.as levy property delinquent taxpayer, pursuant the directions the statute. Even if an action debt Further: could be sustained, common law of Pennsylvania, according com- any law, assessed, to recover taxes duly mon duly and de- notified manded,it does special verdict, nor is appear by there reason from the known facts even to any conjecture, Rawle, 165; Sergeant & Kirby, Turnpike Company v. Mayer 463; Martin, Brown, Turnpike Company v. 2 Pennsylvania, Pennsyl State, vania 104; 103, quoted Large, Wallace, see the 643, Stat. at 14† Dandelet v. Smith. United States. Bank
Opinion was For one of these taxes ever assessed. aught duly revenue of internal prior commissioners appears, assess- instructions to the 1st, to December gave assessed; when, none of these taxes ors that new a new time, the end of that commissioner promulgated law, this action of as to the construction of the views if thеre had been Now, attempt regularly brought. an assumed mistake these reason of taxes, to assess had of the law under which assessments the construction back to the omitted, the assessor could have gone his list he delivered last of fifteen' months before term Yet., to make such the collector. without attempt or, indeed, ever to assessment, far as corrected so appears, in this the court suit, the taxes demanded assess regularly has rendered a amount. below full .their *7 Mill, General, contra. Attorney- Mr. H. Assistant G. delivered the Mr. STRONG Justice opinion are that faсts found verdict special plain- institution created error is a laws of tiffin banking without stockholders or State Pennsylvania, capital business to be stock, and receiving deposits doing invested for the sole benefit of its or loaned depositors; o'f charter authorizes fund contingent retention to the extent of from accumulated ten earnings per of its for the security depositors; centum deposits earned and added to the said the bank contingent 13th, 1866, to December sum, July or undistributed dollars; hundred and seven thousand one 31st, were carried to and added said con- that such earnings fund on the first or undistributed semi-annually, days tingent in each year. of January July facts, this state of the first question presented Upon 13th, 1866, which whether the July law,* to the Internal Revenue authorizes amendment Large, Stat. ¶. Opinion the court. collection of a tax accumulated upon
levy earnings carried It is that the fund. very contingent plain first intent of the act was to a tax all the earn impose upon or income, of the institutions mentioned therein. ings, gains, The “ of its one hundred and twentieth section is, language
There shall be levied and collected tax of five centum on all dividends in or thereafter declared money due, scrip whenever and wherever same to stock payable holders, or or whatsoever, policy-holders, depositors, parties whether citizens or non-residents, aliens, including part or income, bank, trust com .earnings, gains institution, and fire, marine, life, in pany, savings land insurance either stock or mutual, under company, or whatever name or known called the Uuited States style whether Territories, or or specially incorporated existing laws; and on all undistributedsum or sums made under general and added their year surplus during contingеntfunds” banks, institutions, This tax the trust companies, savings are insurance companies pay, it from all to deduct made on authorized account payments or sums dividends be due and money It is, however, so as aforesaid. much of the only payable dividends or is levied sums of tax as due upon money stockholders, policy-holders, &c., payable depositors, are authorized to deduct. Thus it appears the}' two is laid one dividends or subjects, sums —the and the other the due and undistributed payable, surplus carried to a gains fund. *8 These subjects, entire net together making up though other; arе distinct from each are thus earnings, the section as well as treated throughout throughout of the sections act. If the of the act which we portion were it would not all, have admit of a doubt that quoted dividends, both these or annual subjects or semi-annual —the aud the sums added to the fund—are payments, contingent made taxable. is however, institutions re- argued, were savings to the
lieved by proviso That, section. of course, to
Opinion of the it is a in connection with the section which be construed It takes out and it substantially exception. part, that which other- of the the enactment body operation of the be within it. It restrаins the wise would generality “Provided Its is: provisions. previous language not be of life insurance shall tax dividends companies upon nor deemed due until such dividends payable; life insurance com- returned mutual premiums portion the annual or semi-annual interest allowed or nor panies, to banks or institu- the depositors paid savings savings far it so as relates tions considered as dividends.” But . is the banks, to of the an- savings only subject proviso nual or semi-annual interest allowed or paid depos- to the undistributed itors. It makes no reference surplus That it leaves as which be carriеd to fund. surplus section, was in the of the the tax therein it body subject such And to us it quite plain imposed. appears it intention Had been the ex- Congress. purpose banks from the tax on both the empt savings liability pay and on all interest undistributed sums paid depositors mode of carried surplus plain expressing was to that such say purpose proviso from the section. should If excepted operation them such was the from the why except purpose, expressly of a the section take out ? part only Why one operation of taxation leave the other unmen- specifically, subject still more. as the If, And in error tioned? con- plaintiff it was intended that banks should no tends, tax mentioned in the subjects either of the two body such banks mentioned in the section section, why The broad construction contended proviso all? and it repugnant body makes plainly is, therefore, inadmissible. . been called to the fact that in 1867,
Our attention the commissioners internal revenue con- again institutions exempting strued proviso added to their all sums 14th, 1870, and that the funds, July *9 Savings v. Oet. States.
Opinion court. taxation, the same reduced internal substantially employed banks as that contаined in the language respecting savings In view of in error this, plaintiffs argue that the commissioner to what Congress required prescribe make; returns should made it his banks that this law; so, construction on the he that did put duty held that such institutions were not to return un- required distributed carried to a and that after this construction bad been made and acted practical than more three re-enacted the reduced years, tax, Congress amount, Hence, in the same words. is inferred, it the commissioner was is, adopted. construction given when a doubtless, a rule that construction has been judicial statute, re-enactment the statute is given generally in effect a held that construction. legislative adoption can be when This, the statute is however, only capable it, and when that the construction construction has given rule of conduct. The we rule, think, a settled is in- become case. In the first to this the decisions of place, applicable can revenue commissioner be denomi- the internal hardly That officer was not constructions. nated judicial what returns re- the law to prescribe That was the act of to make. prescribed quired Congress with the he had no itself, and dispense power requisition. therefore, no that his decisions were is, presumption There when the act of to the knowledge Congress brought he an And construction was again, gave passed. we have it for, seen, makes the one, proviso impossible body section. repugnant plainly then, to hold that the act of constrained, "Weare error tax to does recover plaintiffs impose upon suit present brought. second error is that the Circuit Court erred assigned action debt is maintainable in that holding taxes. court recovery "We do question presented perceive even was raised or mentioned in the court below, assignment Bank v. United
Opinion of it raised But if first be and it not clear here. *10 must be recovered the answer that the taxes be may, ma}' an debt in the Circuit in action of Court. brought is in error of the
The support assignment argument law; the States no common that thirty- that that laws of enacts fourth section Act Judiciary trial shall be the rules of decision in the several States act one; of which is law, at common that of actions which the tax on banks imposes pro- of Congress for collection, а its assessment and and remedy vides special common law of is a that Pennsylvania, principle creates a when a statute a that right provides particular which that enforced, no other right may remedy by afforded that the statute can be than used. remedj' that the section of the which act,* It must conceded tax, are also they required the assessor or render to assistant assessor a list of the a taxes with declaration under amount of oath attached before the on or 10th of the month thereto, day following dividends or sums of be due in which money any may a for default list any in.rendering and payable, a act are liable to also declares that penalt}'. “in default said list or re- case any rendering making of the tax as default turn, payment required, thereof, the assessment and collection of the tax or any part shall be accordance with pro- penalty general in other cases visions law refusal.” "What neglect are be seen sections those provisions general assessments, thereof to act prescribe delivery and distraint if the collectors, necessary. conceded
It must also bе to be a rule of common law as it is of the-other Pennsylvania many England, States, where a statute a creates and provides right enforcement, for its is remedy particular remedy gener- exclusive of all common-law remedies. ally it is notice what But the rule important upon 1806, Act of § Opinion of the court. ' The reason founded. rule statute, by pro manifests viding particular remedy, intention to pro remedies, hibit other the rule, therefore, rests upon presumed statutory prohibition. and it is en applies forced when one to whom the statute is a rule of con duct sеeks redress for a civil He is confined wrong. out in the statute, he remedy pointed is forbidden to make use of But other. Internal Revenue law, the United are States prohibited rem adopting any edies for the of a debt due to them recovery which are known to the laws if Pennsylvania. prohibitions, either contained in any, express implied, enactment others, not for the government. They may tax collectors. obligatory They may prevent any *11 at law such officers suit But are agents. for the conduct of the rules State. It is a familiar principle is that the not bound King by any Parliamеnt unless he named therein be by special particular words. The most words that can be devised general (for example, any bodies persons, politic affect not person him corporate) in the if tend to least, restrain or diminish they may any his and interests.* He even take the rights may benefit of particular rule thus any though set named.† tled the British Crown is respecting equally applicable this and it has been in government, applied frequently different in the Federal States, courts. It practically as be considered settled that so much of the may royal pre in his oí belоnged King rogatives capacity parens trustee, or universal enters as much into our patriae, political it into the state as does British principles constitution.‡ must, then, be concluded that the is not government pro- hibited contained in the act from by anything 1866 em- Case, Allen, Reports, 74; 11 Magdalen King v. College East, 15 Statutes, 32; † Potter’s Dwarris on Reports, 7 Baldwin, Watts, 54; Rossiter, 1 People Commonwealth v. v. Cowen, 4 ‡ McLean, 143; Davis, 483; Williams, United States v. Same v. 5 Id. 133; Johnson, State, Pennsylvania v. 136; Commonwealth United States v. Greene, ; Hoar, Hewes, Mason Same 2 Id. 311; Crabbe, 427 Same v. v. United States.
Opinion of cоmmon-law for the collection of dues. its ploying remedy reason the rule which denies to the use of others other than the therefore, statutory remedy wanting, and the rule itself must not applicability government, extended, And we not find that reason. do beyond either in held to has been England in.Pennsylvania On informations contrary, applicable. England account, for debt, and informations exchequer discovery duties on have to recover been importations, frequent acts occurrence, of Parliament have provided though for different Numerous remedy payment. enforcing And such cases reported Bunbury’s Reports.* held that debt Lyman,† United States Story Judge might re be maintained the Circuit Court for Massachusetts to cover duties doctrine reasserted upon imported goods; in Meredithv. this court UnitedStates.‡ all this act But author superfluous, at law to recover izes suits It enacts as fol unpaid taxes.§ recovered, “And taxes sued for'and lows: may States, in name the United form be any proper action, or District Court of fore Circuit the Uuited States for which the the district such tax liability have may in. incurred, or where been or maybe party whom due reside tax is at the time of the commence action.” ment of said there
Nor is objection that the anything taxes for has been recovered in case had not No other assessed. assessment than that made *12 to determine tlie statute necessary extent of the bank’s An assessment is liability. the only value determining taxed, the amount of the tax thing of each made individual. officers by designated or by law itself. In the case the present statute required every cent, a bank to tax of five per pay all undis made, or added tributed during year to their * 339; Comyn’s 299, 300, Digest,’title see pp. See also “Debt,” A. Rolle, 9; 1 383. Mason, Peters, 1 432. 14 Stat. at Large, § † ‡ Nugent Supervisors. 187.3.]
Syllabus. funds. There was no occasion or room for other assessment. This was a aof certain sum charge bank,* and without more it made the bank debtor. think,
We therefore, second of error can- assignment he sustained. x JUDGMENTAFFIRMED. Mr. Justice with whom BRADLEY, concurred Mr. Jus- tice FIELD, dissenting: dissent from the
I of the court, on the ground an action will not lie for a kind in question unless it case, be first entered on the assessment-roll. The assessment-roll should be as conclusive as to regarded liable to persons taxation. things not, If it if the is left matter so open any person corporation may for taxes at prosecuted time, it leaves the citizen ex- hazards, and to the posed many inform- mercy prying ers, when the evidence which he could have shown his If an action of immunity exemption perished. without an assessment can be what is the limit of brought, time within which it must he To what statute of brought?' limitations It seems me subject? government the decision introduces new of tax- principle system ation, citizen dangerous rights peace security society.
Nugent Supervisors. “ ” 1. To county constitute a subscription by a stock a railroad com- pany, it is necessary chirogrnphicnl that there an act of subscrib- ing. A resolution of county declaring made, a subscription acceptance subscription of such company, the railroad and notice to county of such delivery company railroad acceptance; proper bonds, county county officersof the acceptance stock, county of the corresponding as a voting levying stockholder and bonds, tax to the interest on the estop county (assuming that it subscribe) a legal right had denying subscription. v. -, Attorney-General Anstruther, VOL. xix.