Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/395

 UNITED STATES V. BBICE. 381 �Company, upon certain trusts, for their beneflt. Testator's widow died Auguat 17, 1874, leaving flve children surviving. If upon the above facta the court should be of opinion that the estate which came into the hands of the execu- tors at the death of the widow was liable to a legacy tax, then verdict for plaintifE for $1,630.44. If the court should be of opinion that such estate was liable net only to the tax, but also to a penalty for non-payment, then verdict for plaintifE for $1,826.04. If the court should be of opinion that such estate was not liable to a legacy tax, then verdict for defendant. �John K. Valentine, U. S. Dist. Att'y, for plaintiff. �Samuel Dickson and John G. Bullitt, for defendants. �Butler, D. J. Judgment must be entered for the defendant on the special verdict. The testator having died in 1865, the claim of the govemment rests on the act of 186e, as modified in 1866. By this act, thus modified, no tax was imposed until the beneficiaries under the will, or intestate laws, came to the possession or enjoyment of their property. The provisions, in this respect, touching legaciea and successions, were substantially the aame, — if not identical; and the decision in Clapp v. Mason, 94 U. S. 589, therefore, leaves noth- ing open to discussion. What is said in that case applies with equal force here. This aot — differing from that of 1862 — created no lien or charge until the government was authorized to demand the tax. No right accrued until that time. The legacies here involved did not vest in possession or enjoyment until 1874, — four years subsequently to the repeal of the statute. This view renders an examination of other questions discussed by counsel unnecessary. What is, or is not, a vested legacy or devise, under the decisions in this state, is often & very difficult question. Here we need not consider it. ���United States v. Erige, Jixecutor, etc.* [Circuit Court, E. D. Pennsylvania. July 8, 1881.) �1. Legact Tax. �Upon facts substantially identical with those of the case of U. S. v Hazwrd, juat preceding, a legacy \Aa not liable to legacy tax, upon the prlnciples laid down in that case. �Motion for judgment in a suit brought by the United States to reeover a legacy tax. The jury, by a special verdict, found substan- tially the following facts : �Singleton A. Mercer died October 14, 1867, leaving personal estate valued at $133,866.08. By bis will he gave to his wife, Maria Mercer, his household goods and silver plate, absolutely, and the residue of his estate he gave to a �•Reported by Frank P. Priohard, Esq, of the Pblladelphla bar. ��� �