
    In the Matter of the Application for Ancillary Letters of Administration, etc., of Paul Tulane, Deceased.
    
      (Supreme Court, General Term, First Department,
    
    
      Filed January 28, 1889.)
    
    1. Collateral inheritance tax—Laws 1885, chap. 483.
    In order to come within the provisions of the act imposing a collateral inheritance tax, the property which forms the basis of the tax in question must pass hy will or by the intestate laws of this state.
    3. Same—"When property not subject to.
    Where the property passes hy the intes'ate laws of another state, it is a case neither within the language or spirit of the statute of this state relating thereto.
    Appeal from order of the surrogate holding that certain personal property within this state belonging to one Paul Tulane, deceased, a resident of the state of New Jersey, is subject to the collateral inheritance tax .imposed by the laws of this state.
    
      Babe & Keller, for app’lts; John B. Fellows, for resp’ts.
   Van Brunt, P. J.

The deceased, at the time of his death and for a long time prior thereto, which occurred in March, 1887, had been a resident of the state of New Jersey, and the property, the succession to which it is sought to affect by this tax, had been deposited by him in the vaults of a safe deposit company in this city for safe keeping.

The deceased died intestate, and letters of administration were granted upon his estate in New Jersey.

The safe deposit company refused to hand over this property until ancillary letters were issued in this state.

The tax is claimed by virtue of the provisions of chapter 483 of the laws of 1885.

This act provides that after its passage all property which shall pass By will or by the intestate laws of this state from any person who may die seized or possessed of the same • while being a resident of this state, or which property shall be within this state or any part of such property or any interest therein or income therefrom, transferred by deed, grant, sale or gift made or intended to take effect in possession or enjoyment after the death of the grantor or bargainor to any person other than those mentioned in the statute, shall be subject to a tax, etc.

It is evident in order to come within the provisions of this act, that the property which forms the basis of the tax in question must pass by will or by the intestate laws of this state or must have been transferred by deed, grant, sale or .gift.

In the case at bar the property in question has not passed . under any of the conditions mentioned in the statute. Such. property has neither passed by will, nor has it been transferred by deed, grant, sale or gift, but it has passed by the intestate laws of the state of New Jersey although situated in this state, a case not within the language nor the spirit «of the statute.

The order appealed from should be reversed, with costs ■and disbursements.

Macomber and Brady, JJ., concur.  