Re: Nils O. Stenman - Storön - Tax problems?

Posted by Magnus on
URL: http://forskarforum.187.s1.nabble.com/Nils-O-Stenman-Storon-Tax-problems-tp5486718p5488470.html

I guess this Google translation is a little confusing. I hope it will do some good:

17 Resolution on und symptoms of NE Stenman and NE Wiklund regarding appellants' taxable year 1886 on revenue of salmon fishing at Bear and Little Gull Cut into Nederkalix parish Royal May ts gracious resolution to the problems Nils Olof Stenman in Storön and Nils Erik Wiklund in Näsbyn in humbly stated above it that since 1886 tax assessment board Thu Nederkalix parish taxed complainants APPROPRIATION for 500 crowns income of salmon fishing at Bear and Little Gull Cut and complainants in Norrbotten County pröfningsnämnd with förmälan to issue fishing would be a tax fishing why fastighetsbevillning paid claims to care exempt from having to especially pay APPROPRIATION for the income from fishing but pröfningsnämnden by decision September 27, 1886 dismissed the claim as the Royal May ts and the kingdom of appeal where the appellants on grounds of both extracts of rateable length over real property for which APPROPRIATION paid in Nederkalix parish in 1886 showing that such property other than agricultural property assessed Fjärdskärs salmon and Repskärsören and Gull cut and partly also one of the appellants December 21, 1872 utfärdadt fastebref on including salmon fishing at Fjärdskär now benämndt Björn completed his at pröfningsnämnden completed action in strikeouts April 19, 1887 to utlåtit to under what Royal May ts befallningshafvande of Norrbotten enlightened well-fisheries at Fjärdskär and at Repskärsören and Trut Cutting been to tax sales but neither fishing at Bear would be from Fjärdskär separate island or fishing at Little Gull Cut existed in the Earth book listed and Royal in May, for the gracious letter April 30, 1881 regarding the disposition of archipelago islands in Nederkalix parish declared on Bear that this island was at the pilot plant leased to the public restricted free fishing in ti 11 glistening water and of the Little Gull Cutting this would behalf of the Crown maintained as to the public until further free accessible fishing spot then and then accordingly fastighetsbevillning not paid for
fishing at Bear and Little Gull cut should find appeal in its bearing on the prescription in 8 subsection 2 litt di bevillningsstadgan no reason in the over complained tax measure to make changes surrounded the Royal Palace June 5, 1891 Royal May t has no less appeal after woe derbörandes residents than even the Royal May DM and empire kammarkolleginm offer concurrent infordradt humble opinion had documents in this case the preferred and carried it into the goal förebragta investigation must be considered ådagalagdt to the way the complainants given up Fjärdskärs and Repskärsörens and Trut Cut salmon, bedrifvas the last at the island Bear and the latter at Repskäret and Little Gull cut but the fish is not in dispute are tax fish for which equal 5 bevillnings regulation fastighetsbevillning be paid and therefore not legally be imposed on the appellants to pay APPROPRIATION the income of the fisheries of them practiced at Bear and Little Gull Cutting find Royal May t upphäfvande of the Administrative Court ruling reasonable exempt claimants from them in 1886 applied for APPROPRIATION income of the relevant fishing, etc. What a