#### JAMES KYLE v. THE MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS OF THE TOWN OF FAYETTEVILLE and others.

No distinction can be made between resident and non-resident shareholders of the stock of National Banks; and the Constitution and our Revenue Laws require the tax to be levied on all such shares, whether owned by residents or non-residents, and whether the latter be named or not.

(See the preceding case between the same parties.)

Motion for an Injunction, before his Honor Judge BuxtoN^ at Chambers, in the Town of Fayetteville, county of Cumberland, on the 13th day of November, 1875.

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. Prom this order the defendants appealed.

*450 Ray, for appellants,

McRae & Broadfo&t, contra,

Rynum, J.

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.

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.

For the reasons stated in that opinion, the judgment below is-reversed, and the action is dismissed.

Pe® Curiam. Judgment reversed.