、

in another State," etc., leaves no room for construction; and it must, therefore, be held that when a circus, exhibiting in the month of July in any State, has paid the special tax of $100, which this statute requires shall be paid, and in the following month goes into another State, special tax, at the rate of $100, reckoned from the first day of August to the first day of July following (under the provisions of section 3237, Revised Statutes, as amended, which apply to the new special taxes as well as to all others under the internal-revenue laws) must be paid, and the requisite special-tax stamp for that State must be taken out accordingly; and so on for every other State in which, during the year, the circus performances are exhibited.

Respectfully, yours, G. W. WILSON, Acting Commissioner. Mr. CHARLES C. WILSON, Charleston, W. Va.

(19944.)

Special tax-Show under canvas.

A show under canvas exhibiting, among other things, acrobatic and athletic exercises, but no feats of horsemanship, and having no menagerie, is not subject to special tax as a circus ($100) under paragraph 7 of section 2, act of June 13, 1898, if the acrobatic exercises are so few and simple as to make it unreasonable to hold that they constitute the show a circus.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

Washington, D. C., August 24, 1898.

SIR: Your letter of the 16th instant has been received, inclosing a letter from Mr. J. L. Fusner, manager for Fusner Brothers, 128 Liberty street, Allegheny City, inquiring whether they are to be compelled to pay the same amount of special tax as a circus for a "small show under canvas, consisting of acrobatic and athletic exercises, but containing no riding acts or feats of horsemanship, and no menagerie.”

You will please inform them that if the acrobatic exercises to which they refer are elaborate or extensive enough to bring them within the meaning of the words "acrobatic sports," in the sixth paragraph of section 2 of the act of June 13, 1898, they must pay special tax as a circus under that paragraph. But if these acrobatic exercises are so few and simple (such as a mere trapeze performance or the like) as to make it unreasonable to hold that they constitute the show a circus within the meaning of that paragraph, then and in that case the show may be regarded as coming within the terms of paragraph 8, and as, therefore, subject only to the special tax of $10 for each State in which they exhibit.

Respectfully, yours,

N. B. SCOTT, Commissioner.

Mr. JAMES S. FRUIT, Collector Twenty-third District, Pittsburg, Pa.

(19975.)

Special tax-Circus.

A small wagon show having no "circus feats," but only "such acts as trapeze, wire walking, trained ponies, singing, and dancing," is not to be regarded as a circus within the meaning and intent of paragraph 7 of section 2, act of June 13, 1898. It is a show coming under the eighth paragraph, for which the special tax of $10 is required to be paid.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

Washington, D. C., August 30, 1898. SIR: With reference to the case of Sun Brothers, about which you recently wrote to this office, and in reply were advised that, from the printed advertisements sent out by them (a specimen of which you inclosed with your letter), it appeared that their show was a complete circus, for which the special tax of $100 was required to be paid under paragraph 7 of section 2, act of June 13, 1898, you are now informed that a letter received from Sun Brothers, dated the 20th instant, states that they "have no circus or circus feats," but "have such acts as trapeze, wire walking, trained ponies, singing, and dancing," and "have nothing you see on bill" distributed by them, which they receive "from large printing houses and use up in job lots."

Their show, they further state, is a "small wagon show," appearing only in "small towns," the charge for admission to which is "10 and 25 cents."

Upon these facts you are hereby advised that the special tax of $100, under paragraph 7, is not required to be paid for this show. It is held that it can not properly be regarded as a circus within the true meaning and intent of that paragraph, but that it is among the other public exhibitions or shows contemplated by paragraph 8 of that section, for which the special tax of $10 is required to be paid in each State. N. B. SCOTT, Commissioner. Mr. H. L. HERSHEY, Collector Ninth District, Lancaster, Pa.

Respectfully, yours,

COLLATERAL SECURITIES, PLEDGING of.

(19685.)

Stamp tax-Pledging of stock certificates.

Stock certificates given as collateral on notes-Renewal of notes-Pledges of notes.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

Washington, D. C., July 13, 1898.

SIR: I reply as follows to the questions presented in your letter of the 8th instant:

Where stock certificates are given as collateral on notes, stamps are not required on these certificates as in a case of actual transfer; but

they are to be stamped as a pledge for the amount for which they are hypothecated. On each renewal of the note, while the note must be stamped anew, new stamps are not required on the certificates remaining pledged as before.

In the event of a bill of sale of the certificates used as collateral being attached thereto, it seems that this must be regarded as a transfer of the certificates, and that the tax of 2 cents on each $100 of face value or fraction thereof must be paid, and the requisite stamp affixed thereto. But the successive renewals of the notes do not require the stamping anew of the bill of sale of the certificates.

Where long-time notes, dated previous to July 1, 1898, secured by a deed of trust, are used as collateral on commercial paper, the deed of trust and the notes are required to be stamped, not on the basis of their face value, but on the amount for which they are pledged (that is to say, the memorandum of their pledge must be so stamped). This pledge of notes and deed of trust (remaining the same as at the beginning) does not require to be stamped again because of the successive renewals of the note for which they are held as collateral.

In the particular case to which you refer, wherein you "have a note secured by deed of trust or mortgage on real estate made two years ago, covering not only the original note but any successive renewals," it is held that on the next renewal of the note the pledge of the deed of trust to secure it (which pledge remains as originally made, prior to July 1, 1898, without any renewal) does not require a stamp, although by express provision of the statute each renewal of the note on or after July 1, 1898, must be duly stamped.

Respectfully, yours,

Mr. B. W. PATTERSON,

N. B. SCOTT, Commissioner.

Cashier of the Dollar Savings Bank, Wheeling, W. Va.

(19736.)

Stamp tax-Securities pledged for loans.

When certificates of stock or other securities are pledged for a loan, the stamp tax is to be reckoned, not on the face value of the certificates (or securities), but on the amount of money loaned (above $1,000).

TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

Washington, D. C., July 20, 1898.

SIR: I have received your letter of the 18th instant, presenting the following question for a ruling as to stamp tax under Schedule A of the act of June 13, 1898, viz:

Suppose I want to borrow some money, and I offer as collateral security certificates of stock in a corporation that were dated one or more

years previous to the passage of the war-revenue law, is it necessary that those certificates should be stamped?

In reply, you are hereby advised that under that paragraph of Schedule A of the act relating to "mortgage or pledge," the memorandum of the pledge of the certificates to which you refer as collateral security must be stamped, if the debt secured exceeds $1,000. The stamp tax, however, is to be reckoned, not on the face value of the certificates of stock pledged, but on the amount of the money loaned thereon.

Respectfully, yours,

N. B. SCOTT, Commissioner.

Mr. HULLIHEN QUARRIER, Wheeling, W. Va.

(19841.)

Stamp tax-Pledge of insurance policy to secure loan.

Pledge of insurance policy to secure loan not taxable if the amount secured is less than $1,000. If loan exceeds $1,000, it is taxable as a pledge of personal property-Pledge of insurance policy not such an assignment as requires a stamp at the same rate as imposed on the original instrument.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

Washington, D. C., August 6, 1898.

SIR: This office is in receipt of your letter of July 20, 1898, asking, "When a policy of life assurance, say for $5,000, is assigned to secure a note of $500, what amount of revenue stamps is required in such a case?"

In reply to your inquiry, this office is of the opinion that in the above-mentioned case the pledge of the policy of the life insurance, being for the sum of $500, is not taxable under the clause of Schedule A taxing mortgages or pledges of personal property, the amount of the pledge being less than the minimum amount taxable.

The assignment of a policy of life insurance in this case to secure a pledge is not an assignment of the instrument such as is contemplated in the provisio of said clause, and does not require a stamp to the full amount that was put upon the original instrument, nor in this case to any amount.

When a policy of life insurance is assigned as collateral security for a loan exceeding $1,000, it should be stamped as a pledge according to the amount of the debt secured, and not according to the face of the policy.

Respectfully, yours,

Mr. JOSEPH BOWES,

N. B. SCOTT, Commissioner.

Manager Equitable Life Assurance Society, Washington, D. C.

(19978.)

Stamp tax--Notes, pledge of stock as collateral, etc.

Stamp tax is required on the notes, on the pledge or memorandum of pledge (if the amount secured thereby exceeds $1, 000), and on the renewal of the notes; but not again on the pledge, if it remains as at the beginning, without formal renewal. TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

Washington, D. C., August 30, 1898.

SIR: Mr. N. B. Stearns, cashier of the Manchester National Bank, New Hampshire, has written this office, under date of the 11th ultimo, regarding stamp tax on a note secured by a certificate of stock pledged as collateral, and the renewal of said note.

In reply, you will please inform him as follows:

For illustration, if one executes a promissory note to a bank and secures same by shares of stock by delivering a certificate indorsed in blank to the bank, in such a case the note should be stamped for the . required amount as a note, and the memorandum of pledge (accompanying the securities) should, in addition, have the stamp affixed, as required by a pledge of personal property to secure payment of the note (if the amount of the note exceeds $1,000.)

The pledge of stock as collateral should not be stamped as a memorandum of sale, because it is not a sale, and the title of the stock does not pass out of the person owning and pledging it until the condition arises, and it is disposed of by the holder, in accordance with the terms of the condition.

At each renewal of the note the new note should be stamped; but if the old collateral, as originally pledged, without any formal renewal of the pledge, remains in the possession of the bank, additional stamp tax is not required to be paid thereon.

Respectfully yours,

N. B. SCOTT, Commissioner.

Mr. JAMES A. WOOD, Collector, Portsmouth, N. H.

(20193.)

Collateral securities and instruments used therein, pledging of.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT,

OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

Washington, D. C., October 13, 1898.

To collectors of internal revenue: The appended opinion of Hon. James E. Boyd, Assistant AttorneyGeneral, relative to the pledging of collateral securities and the instruments used therein, is published for the information of all concerned.

N. B. SCOTT, Commissioner.