Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 10.djvu/532

£20 FEDESAL BEfOBTEB. �1865 and 1866, but said firms and O'Neil had several distinct and separate business interests, and were not jointly concerned in the manufacture or sale of tobacco. The plaintiff was never a partner, or jointly interested with any of said persons or firms, and never had any interest in any tobacco or tobacco business at 208 Fulton street, New York, or elsewhere. Until July, 3880, the plaintiff had no information of said tax, and no knowledge that her name was con- uected with it. There is no record concerning said tax in the office of the defendant Blake, and the pretended record thereof was got up and sent to Washington by a collector or assessor, with certain books and papers seized at 208 Fulton street, New York, now with the com- niissioner of internai revenue. Stivers, though requested, bas refused to revoke said order of collection, and any personal property which the plaintiff has, which Corwin can find, will be liable to seizure unless the tax be paid. The stock of tobacco at 208 Fulton street, owned by one or more of said firms, and worth $60,000, was, soon after the assessment of said tax, seized by the collector of internai revenue in New York, and sold, on account of the non-payment of said tax, and a large sum was realized by the United States there- from. At the time there was about $20,000 worth of tobacco stored in said store, owned by the plaintiff 's father, which was included in said seizure and sale, though none of the persons against whom said tax was assessed had any interest therein. Another large sum has been realized by the collector of another internai revenue district on said tax, but no credit is made for said sums on the claims so pre- sented against her. A farm in which Sharkey had an interest was, before her divorce, sold by the collector of internai revenue for the twenty-third district of New York, on account of said tax. Sbarkey's conduct towards her was coercive and cruel, and she had no oppor- tunity or power to resist bis improper practices in respect of said partnership paper or tobacco business, and if at any time her name appeared in any of said matters, it was without her free will or volun- tary consent. What means she has from the estate of Mr. Kensett are paid over to her by trustees under his will, and are neeessary for her support, and that of a daughter, four years old. She has applied to the commissioner of internai revenue for a remission of said tax, on her affidavit of the foregoing facts. He declined, on the thirtieth of September, 1880, to stay the proceedings of the defendant Stivers. Her grievance cannot be remedied by any action at law, as she can- not pay the large amount of the tax and sue to recover it back, nor ��� �