delivered the opinion of the court :
Walter G. Oakman, Samuel Untermyer, the Guaranty Trust Company and the Andrew Freedman Home filed in the county court of Cook county their petition praying the court to vacate and set aside an order fixing and assessing an inheritance tax upon shares of capital stock of nonresident corporations passing by the will of Andrew Freedman, deceased, to non-residents of the State. Len Small, Treasurer of the State of Illinois, the county treasurer of Cook county, the Attorney General and the inheritance tax attorney were made defendants, and on their motion the court struck from the files the petition and denied the relief prayed for, and the petitioners appealed.
The facts set forth in the petition, which were to be taken as true for the purposes of the motion to strike the petition frorp the files, are as follows: Andrew Freedman died on December 4, 1915, leaving a will, which was probated in the surrogate’s court of New York, whereby Walter G. Oakman, Samuel Untermyer and the Guaranty Trust Company were appointed executors and trustees, Elizabeth Freedman, mother of the testator, was given a life estate in one-fourth of the income of the residuary estate, Isabel Freedman, a sister of the testator, was given a similar interest, and the Andrew Freedman Home took the remainder, none of whom were residents of this State. On April 22, 1916, the county judge of Cook county appointed an appraiser to appraise the property passing by the will on which an inheritance tax might be due this State. The appraiser reported that there passed by the will 100 shares of the preferred seven per cent stock of the Moline Plow Company, a corporation of this State, of the par value of $100 per share, with a valuation of $9600; also a great many shares of corporations of other States having property in this State, with proportionate values of such property at an aggregate of $48,241.72. On this appraisement he reported an inheritance tax against the Andrew Freedman Home amounting to $2123.95 on the transfer of the shares of stock under the will. On May 24, 1916, the county judge entered an order assessing the tax at the rate of five per cent, amounting to $2123.95, on the shares of stock, all of which, except the shares of stock of the Mo-line Plow Company, were of stock of foreign corporations passing to non-residents of this State. The tax was paid by the executors. The petition alleged that the order imposing the inheritance' tax, so far as it was assessed upon the capital stock of foreign corporations owned by the nonresident testator at the time of his death and passing by his will to non-residents, was null and void for want of jurisdiction in the county court.
If the court had jurisdiction to make any order at all concerning the subject matter, its judgment, although erroneous, which it unquestionably was, (People v. Griffith,
Jurisdiction in controversies between litigants includes jurisdiction of the person and of the subject matter, and jurisdiction of the subject matter means jurisdiction of the class of cases to which the particular case belongs, and it is always conferred by law. It does not mean jurisdiction of the particular case, which must be acquired by some method of bringing the case before the court for adjudication. (O’Brien v. People,
cannot be conferred by consent or by failure to interpose an objection. The act to tax gifts, inheritances, legacies and transfers gives to the county court jurisdiction to hear and determine all questions in relation to taxes arising under the provisions of the act, and the county court therefore had jurisdiction of the class of cases to which the one now under consideration belongs. The jurisdiction conferred by law, however, is necessarily confined to the territory within which the law is effective, and a court may not act upon property not within the jurisdiction. Where the subject matter of litigation is specific property the jurisdiction must be exercised in the State where it is situated. Therefore the court cannot grant relief as to property held by non-residents not within the jurisdiction, and the decree of the county court as to the manner in which lands in another State belonging to a deceased person shall be distributed is void. (Harris v. Pullman,
The inheritance or succession tax is not levied upon the property inherited or devised but upon tire right to take the property by descent or devise. It is not a tax upon the property itself but upon the right to succeed to it, (Kochersperger v. Drake,
The judgment of the county court is reversed and the cause is remanded, with directions that if the facts alleged in the petition are proved the prayer of the petition shall be allowed. Reversed and remanded, with directions.