The Southern Electric Light and Power Company
v.
The City of Philadelphia and William J. Roney, Receiver of Taxes of the City of Philadelphia
v.
The City of Philadelphia and William J. Roney, Receiver of Taxes of the City of Philadelphia
Appeal, No. 37.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Apr 24, 1899.
E. Spencer Miller, with him Alfred S. Miller, assistant city solicitor, and John L. Kinsey, city solicitor, for appellant,, E. O. Michener and Charles E. Morgan, Jr., for appellee,
Dean, Fell, Green, McCollum, Mitchell, Oubiam.
Cited by 17 opinions | Published
The circumstances that a portion of .the property of the plaintiff is reserved for use for its manufacturing purposes in case of emergency or to meet the demands of increasing business, does not alter or change its character as being part of the premises used or intended to be used for its essential objects. It is still a part of the property which in its entirety is exempt from local taxation as real estate. The distinction which is urged between “the manufacturing of electricity” and “the supplying of it,” is without force. The power to supply includes the power to manufacture it.
The decree of the court below is affirmed and appeal dismissed at the cost of the appellants.