The pleadings and facts of this case are the same as those in the preceding case, between the same parties, with this exception: In this case, the tax complained of was levied under the Revenue Act of 1874, in which the shares of stock in the National banks in this State are not in express terms required to be listed. In all other respects the facts are the same. His Honor, upon the hearing, granted the injunction upon the plaintiff’s giving the bond required by law.
Decided 1876-06-05
Rynum, J.
¶1
The only distinction between tbis1 case and the other between the same parties, decided at this Term is, that the tax here was levied for the year 1874, and the revenue act of that year does not in express terms tax the shares of non-residents in National Banks located in this State.
¶2
We have decided in the other case that no distinction can be made between resident and non-resident shareholders and that the Constitution and revenue laws require the tax to be levied upon all shares in National Banks, and that the laws equally apply to non-residents, whether named or not.
¶3
For the reasons stated in that opinion, the judgment below is-reversed, and the action is dismissed.
