City of Wilmington v. MacKs

Ashe, J., after stating the case. I was not on the bench when this case was argued in behalf of the defendant, but the case having been duly considered in conference, the court is of the opinion it is not now an open question, the principle involved having been decided in the case of Holland v. Isler, 77 N. C., 1. The plaintiffs in that case were the commissioners of the town of Goldsboro, and the defendants were lawyers and physicians residing in said town. The charter of said corporation empowered the commissioners to tax lawyers, physicians, &c. The plaintiffs under that power given in their charter had assessed a monthly tax upon the defendants, which they resisted. The court below held that the plaintiffs had the right to impose and collect said tax, and from the judgment rendered the defendants appealed to this court, where the judgment of the superior court was affirmed, and Reads, J. speaking for the court, said: “ The constitution provides *91 that the general assembly may tax trades, professions, &c. Art. V., § 3. The general assembly has authorized the town of Goldsboro to lay and collect a monthly tax on lawyers and physicians, &c. Private Laws 1866. The defendants are lawyers and physicians in the town of Goldsboro, and the town has laid a tax upon them which they refuse to pay. This would seem to make a clear case against them.” Note. — The decision in Wilmington v. McRae, at this term, is the same as in the above case. We think this case is decisive of that before us. There is no error. The judgment is affirmed. No error. Affirmed.