Inhabitants of Great Barrington v. County Commissioners of Berkshire

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Inhabitants of Great Barrington v. County Commissioners of Berkshire

33 Mass. 572

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedSeptember 15, 1835

StatusPublished

This text of 33 Mass. 572 (Inhabitants of Great Barrington v. County Commissioners of Berkshire) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Inhabitants of Great Barrington v. County Commissioners of Berkshire, 33 Mass. 572 (Mass. 1835).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

All the exceptions to the proceedings ol the county commissioners are now waived, . except that which raises the question on the merits, namely, whether a citizen of this Commonwealth, holding stock in a turnpike company of another State, is liable to be taxed for such stock in this State. The Court are of opinion that Rosseter was liable to be taxed for his turnpike shares, though in a turnpike lying within the limits of another State, and that the decision of the commissioners in this respect cannot be supported. The tax in question was the tax for 1833, and by law, the property taxable, was to be ascertained by the next preceding tax act.

* The next preceding tax act was that passed in 1831, and it included in terms “ all bank and insurance stock and shares or property in any incorporated company for a bridge or a turnpike road.” No exception is made of companies in other States, and the Court perceive no reason for raising any by implication. It was supposed that a difference would arise from the consideration, that by the laws of New York, the turnpike company holds the land over which the road is made, in fee, so that a turnpike is real estáte. If it be so, we think it can make no difference. The bene'ficial interest, the valuable property, consists in the franchise and right to receive tolls, and .whether the right of the company in the soil of their road be technically a fee or a perpetual easement, makes no difference.. So in many joint stock companies within the State ; the bulk of the property out of which the profits arise, is real estate, vested in the corporation in fee ; but the shares [574]*574are personal property and are taxed as such to the individual holders.*

Writ of certiorari ordered.

St. 1785, c. 50, § 8

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam:

All the exceptions to the proceedings ol the county commissioners are now waived, . except that which raises the question on the merits, namely, whether a citizen of this Commonwealth, holding stock in a turnpike company of another State, is liable to be taxed for such stock in this State. The Court are of opinion that Rosseter was liable to be taxed for his turnpike shares, though in a turnpike lying within the limits of another State, and that the decision of the commissioners in this respect cannot be supported. The tax in question was the tax for 1833, and by law, the property taxable, was to be ascertained by the next preceding tax act.

* The next preceding tax act was that passed in 1831, and it included in terms “ all bank and insurance stock and shares or property in any incorporated company for a bridge or a turnpike road.” No exception is made of companies in other States, and the Court perceive no reason for raising any by implication. It was supposed that a difference would arise from the consideration, that by the laws of New York, the turnpike company holds the land over which the road is made, in fee, so that a turnpike is real estáte. If it be so, we think it can make no difference. The bene'ficial interest, the valuable property, consists in the franchise and right to receive tolls, and .whether the right of the company in the soil of their road be technically a fee or a perpetual easement, makes no difference.. So in many joint stock companies within the State ; the bulk of the property out of which the profits arise, is real estate, vested in the corporation in fee ; but the shares [574]*574are personal property and are taxed as such to the individual holders.*

Writ of certiorari ordered.

St. 1785, c. 50, § 8

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 Mass. 572, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/inhabitants-of-great-barrington-v-county-commissioners-of-berkshire-mass-1835.