TAXATION OF BANK STOCK.
The LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR announced the special order for this hour, being the consideration of the bill [S. 98] for the assessment and collection of taxes for municipal purposes on bank shares.
The question being on its passage--it having been read the third time--
Mr. HUGHES stated his understanding that the Supreme Court had decided two or three times that the stock of State and National banks can not be taxed for municipal purposes. He desired it recommitted, and moved to recommit the bill, with intructions to inquire into the expediency of providing that the taxes collected from non-residents for county, township and road purposes in counties where the parties reside. He read a list of the stockholders of the First National Bank of Indianapolis, showing that a very large portion was owned by parties residing outside of the city, amounting to over one hundred and eighty-four thousand dollars. These parties pay in Marion county, for State, county, township and road purposes. He thought they should be paid in the counties where they reside, provided it is in the State of Indiana. He moved to recommit the bill for the purpose indicated.
Mr. FISHER proposed as being the same in principle to amend the instructions by providing that parties owning land in one county shall pay the tax in the county where they re- page: 345[View Page 345] sidethat being in keeping with the amendment the Senator proposes.
Mr. CARSON regarded the proposed amendments unjust. Bank stock and personal property makes money for the owner in the county where the bank is located, and the thereon should in justice be paid in the county where the money is earned.
Mr. HUGHES could not see the point made by the Senator from Wabash [Mr. Fisher.] Owners of Bank stock can be sued where-ever they may be found, on process connected therewith; while in real estate suits the practice is different. He replied also to the objection made by the Senator from Allen [Mr. Carson.] He presumed the use of the capital here was a great benefit to the city, and it should be glad to have it invested here, even if it paid no tax here.
Mr. FISHER, in reply, thought the place to tax property was where it was found. Capital invested here is as fully protected if owned by non-residents, as by persons living here. He was unable to appreciate the objection urged against his amendment by the Senator from Monroe [Mr. Hughes.] He insisted on the justness of the proposition.
Mr. GREEN moved to lay the motion to recommit on the table.
The motion was agreed to upon a division; affirmative 21, negative 14.
Mr. CRAVENS suggested that this is a bill for raising revenue, and such bills cannot originate in the Senate under the Constitution. Therefore he moved to lay the bill on the table.
The motion was agreed to.
A message from the Governor was received communicating a report of the disbursements made in pursuance of the act of 1867, for payment of counsel in suits instituted against soldiers, on account of acts commmitted by them while in service. [See House proceedings of yesterday afternoon, page 326.]
It was referred to the Committee on Finance.
