HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ussccases0467 and id is 1 raw text is: Oct. 1874.]
SCHOLEY V. REW.
Statement of the case.
Mr. Justice FIELD dissented from the judgment, being
of opinion that the plaintiffs were not wholesale dealers,
either within the common acceptation of the terms or the
meaning of the statute.
SCHOLEY V. REW.
1. The ,succession tax, imposed by the acts of June 30th, 1864, and July
13th, 1866, on every devolution of title to any real estate, was not a
direct tax, within the meaning of the Constitution; but an 11 impost
or excise, and was constitutional and valid.
2. A devise of an equitable interest in real estate, in which personal prop-
erty had been invested by the trustee with the assent of the devisor, be-
fore the making of the will, was a devolution of real estate within the
meaning of the acts of June 30th, 18*64, and July 13th, 1866, and the
devisee is liable to the succession tax imposed thereby, in respect of it,
if he has received its value, although in proceedings for partition he has
had assigned to him only personal property.
3. An alien to whom a devi-e of an interest in real estate has been made,
and who has received its value in proceedings for partition, is estopped
to set up against a demand for a succession tax thereon, that by the law
of the State where the estate is, the devise is absolutely null and void.
4. Quo-re. Whether a general assignment of errors that the judgment below
on a special case was for the wrong party, is sufficient.
5. Semble. That an objection that a devise is void because of the alienage
of the devisee, cannot first be taken by him in this court on a writ of
error to the judgment of a Circuit Court on a special case, although the
record discloses the fact of alienage.
ERROR to the Circuit Court for the Northern District of
New York, in which court Scholey, a British subject, sued
Rew, collector of internal revenue, to recover the amount
of a succession tax which Rew, as collector, had de-
manded of him, Scholey, and wich-asserting it to be
illegal-Scholey had paid only on compulsion and under
protest.
The case was found specially, by the Circuit Court, on a
waiver of a jury, under the act of March'3d, 1865, which
authorizes such a finding by the court, and enacts that when](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ussccases0467&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)