Case ID: mich-np-r_1/html/lxxxii-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Cooley,J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Sammons vs. Holloway.
    Th 0 act of i Congress declaring that unstamped instruments should not bo received in evidence does not apply to State courts.
    Error to Lenawee Circuit.
   Opinion by

Cooley,J.

Holloway sued Sammons upon a promissory note. Sammons defended upon the ground that it was not sufficiently stamped under' the revenue law, and that it was consequently neither admissible in evidence nor could a recovery be had upon it if admitted. It was decided in Clemens vs. Conrad, 19 Mich., 170, that the provisions of the act of Congress declaring that unstamped instruments should not be received as evidence, did not apply to the State courts. Congress may levy stamp duties and enforce'their collection by proper penalties, but the declaring void a contract lawful under the State law, is not a proper penalty, and Congress has no power to do this.

What Congress might do regarding contracts which fall within the domain of foreign or inter-state commerce, we do not undertake to say.

Judgment affirmed.