Stewart v. Virginia
Syllabus
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion
Mr. Chief Justioe Waite delivered the opinion of the court.
The order remanding this case is affirmed. A proceeding under the act of Assembly of Virginia,,approved January 14, 1882, Anioni v. Greenhow, 107 U. S. 771 , as amended by the act Of March 12, 1884, for the “ identification and verification” of coupons tendered in payment of taxes, debts, or demands due the State, is not a suit of a civil nature ai’ising under the Constitution or laws of the United- States within' the meaning of the act of March 3, 1875,18 „Stat. 470, ch. 137. The only purpose of such a proceeding is to determine whether the coupons tendered “ are genuine, legal coupons, which are legally receivable for taxes, dues and demands.” The court has nothing to do in that proceeding with the obligation of the State to receive the coupons in payment of the particular tax or demand for which they were tendered. The tender being made, it becomes the duty of the collector, under the law, 'to receive and receipt' for the coupons.“ for the purpose of identification and verification,” and to deliver them to the judge of the •proper court to that end. . The tax-payer then files his petition praying “ that a jury be impaneled to try the question as to whether they are genuine, legal coupons, which are legally receivable for taxes, debts and demands.” This is the only issue that can be tried, and if finally decided in favor of the taxpayer, the coupons are to be received by the collector.for such of the taxes, dues and demands for which they were tendered as can; under the contract of the State, be paid in that way.
*615 The court has no authority under the law to determine in that proceeding what taxes- may be so paid. It thus appears that the issue to be tried cannot involve any question arising under the Constitution or laws' of the IJnitéd States.
Affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.