41 N.J.L. 117 | N.J. | 1879
The opinion of the court was delivered by
The plaintiff claims that the parsonage is exempt from taxation by pi. 64 of the tax law, (Rev., p. 1151,) because it is a building erected for religious purposes. It has been settled by two decisions in this court, that a parsonage and lot standing unconnected with a church edifice, are subject to taxation. State, Ref. Dutch Ch., pros., v. Lyon, 3 Vroom 360; State, Nevin, pros., v. Krollman, 9 Vroom 323, 574.
The legislature having repealed the. act of 1863, which expressly exempted a parsonage, manifestly did not intend to include it in the descriptive words “buildings erected and used for religious purposes.”
It is not apparent how a mere change in the location of the building can relieve it from liability to assessment. It is a parsonage, used as a residence of the pastor, while he retains - his connection with the church.
Proximity to the church cannot change its character. The
The assessment should be affirmed.