“This case, although it comes before the court in the form of a rule to show cause why the action should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction, is connected with that question by an agreement of the counsel, that the finding of the jury, subject to the opinion of the court upon the question of jurisdiction, should be put into the form of a special verdict, and judgment to be entered thereon, as may be decided on this rule, so as to enable either party to sue out a writ of error to the Supreme Court. The facts stated are, that before and during the war of the revolution, the lessor of the plaintiff was a citizen of the state of South Carolina, where he owned large estates, and resided with his family, until about the year 1791, when he removed with his family, to Philadelphia, where he has ever since resided. Neither he nor his family have resided in South Carolina since the year 1795 or 1796. He represented that state in congress until the year 1804; since which time, he has exercised no public employment under that state. During his residence in this city, and until the year 1812, he was in the habit of making annual visits to his estates in South Carolina; but he has not been to South Carolina from that year to the year 1817, when this suit was brought. A personal tax has been regularly assessed upon the plaintiff in this state; which he has nevertheless always refused to pay.”