Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1820-01-15

process. aud the commission, may be taxed ~
the state - which they reside. The process
and the commission are mediums OF sovereign
agency-inuicia OF the sovereign POKER tn-
ployed pro hac rice-are Identified with the
sovereign, and like sovereignty. are exempt
from taAaiiou. The paper and the parchment
are just subjects OF taxation, but they exist no
longer, they are lest IN the process aud the
commission. So money is lost in tax or re, enue.
Ii dUes not. to lie sure, cease 10 be money When |
II becomes revenue, mon. than the paper and |
parchment cease to exist as sHCh, when they |
become commissions aud process Uut like |
those articles, II SennObled IN It's employment |
by, and Identification with, the sovereign, |
whose iuviOability II enjoys, while the con- |
neXioG imported BY the terms, tar or rerenue |
exists. Being OF opinion that the stock OF the |
office OF Discount and deposit located by the
bank OF the United States al Lexington within
this state, is liable (upon the hypothesis that
the charter OF that institution Is iawiui)t TO be
taxed by the state, IL Is next TO be enqnlIed
whether the law imposing the tax thereon, Is
valid or void. That act is alleged TO be void.
because ii imposes tax upon the pIopcrt, Oi
citizens of the United States, and others, not
within the limits OF the sovereignty OF the state.
Ii canSot surely be commended, that the prop
erty within this state, of persons not re,ident
therein, cannot be taxed By the stale. That
rropertyis protected by the government within
which n may bC reimIttcdlo exist and that Il
is liable 10 the government for that pIoieciiou,
aud that the latter, III the eXacuOu OF AN equl-
Valent therefor, may at lis option, addreSsitselt
10 the property, or Its proprietor, seems 10 be
apolitical principle, OF automatic cieaIncss;
one upon which all governments have acted
The power of acting an rom, ~ inherent 10
sovereignty, one without which II could not do
1t IS necessary TO justice even IN Judicial pro-
ceedings, as wellin relation TO the jurisdiction
of Courts, as TO their adjudication-Ahd the
action IN rem, is recouciled TO the principle
that Intelligence aud responsibility are iusepa-
iable, by a fiction which like other le- al and
politieal hctlOns, supplies the place OF ie~h'y,
and cannet be controyerted. The proprietor
Is supposed to be addressed aud notified IN,
and through the address to his property
Where a mans treasure is, there will his
heart be also" Property needs from It's very
nature, as wellthe care of it, proprietor, as the
protection of the government in which IL is
III cannot be without the latter, and d just esti'
mate OF human nature, forbids tue presump-
ton, that II Is destitute OF the former. There rs
therefore nothing in the objection 1t is aledg
ed as further objection 10 thus statute, that il
imposes upoT The offices of that institution
heavy penalties for the discharge OF their ON
ciaL duties. They are not officers OF thu go
veInment of the uatoD-Ihey agents Uf
The Stockholders, and al. ciliZens of this
State-the penalty inflicted BY lie law, is not
tor the discharge of official duly, but Tor the
violation of that primary duty winch as GILL
zehs they owe 10 their governments. Ii the mo-
hey I'm the vaults OF that office, and il not only
That, but the Office itself was as we have sup.
posed, liable to be taxed bS tue ,tate; L. wa>
III duIN Of theagentS of that Office, 10 ave pad
I've TAX, and IN failing 10 20 so, hey viUlat-
Ell not only Their dut, TO TN, state. but e. the
St"ch-hoinerS who must be presuu Ell, vshrn
tNey bought the stock TO have assum, a to ia>
whatever tax. might acIue thereon: tor AL
property is bought held, and transferred sub
leCl TO the laws of the sovereign WIuin whose
limits II rs We cannot think there Is any .uIus
III thIs objection. IL is father oblected that
The penalty infiIcted by this law is II violation
OF the 18Th section OF the bill of rights, IA ine
state constitution, which provides, That en-
cessve bail shall not be required nor exce.-
SiVe hnes imposed nor cruel iunisiIm. "a, III
Hicted lie objection, rests, II IL supposed
upon the intermediate provision, of thaI bu-
name ternary. No definite criterion il fur
hlshed OS the constitution, or bill Of rights by
winch to ascertain, what fine would, or would
not, be ecceSSire within the provision above
quoted
The fine imposed, should bear Just propor
tom, Ia tie offence committed, the situation
circumstances, and character OF the otfenI-
er-l hat proportion must be ascertaued by
The sound discretion of the court-a aasTant
transcensIon, by the legislature i'm fixing lin,
fine, OF that JUST relative proportion, between
offence aud fine, would be denomnated sr
ceSSlte-Bni the traDscenson, by the ies.lsl,-
tnie, should be fiagrauily outrageous, 10 all
thorlse the Judge TO pronounce the fine ok
ceSsive, and vacate the legislative act The
me III this case is 5 10, 000-1he tax exactpd
by inc legislature was s ,000-The offence
was a failure TO pay the taX-Ihe penalty i'm.
posed for the taIinre. rs double the amount of
Inc duty required We Cannot saw il Isexcess-
Ne-ils amount seems to have been fixed, by
criterion OF great antiquity, in all moned
matters, OF private as well as public character
IL is farther objected that this act of the To-
gIslainre imposes The taX upon The corporation.
ahd not upon It's money or property. This
upon faIr construction OF the act (Which is
loosely worded) We are inclined to saw, is the
fact.
We are therefore unanimously of the on;n-
ION that the law establishing the Office of dis
count within this state Is unconstitutional. and
TINT The state has on that account right ~
taN II. lie chief justice is of the opinion that
The capital stock of that office Hpon the SIM
potion that IT'S charter Is Legitimate, cannot
be taxed by the state. Judges Owsley ana
Rowan are OF opinion that the state may tax
It's capital stock, whether IFS charter be eytt-
mate or not. The chief Justice aud iudge
OwSley are OF opinion that the decision of the
supreme court of the nation, in the case nj
vi Cul!och and the state of Maryland. is deci.
siVe OF tie question in this case and bindino
upon thls court. To preserve an uuiformi,y
IA the operation Of the constitution and laws of |
the Oh"ed states IN every part of tie nation |
us essential that there should be vested il, |
om' tribunal The power of ultimately deciding |
all questions involving their validity or effect
ann understanding the supreme cour, "a he |
vested with that power and that il has uud.r
the constitution and laws of the United sfsiss
appellate jurisdiction il this case, they con-
ceive themselves concluded nv its drctsinn |
and therefore affirm the Judgment of the court |
briow; fsom wliCh a'iTmance Judge Rowan
disscnts. He REFERENCES that exalted tIibu-
nal. and respects its opinions With the chief
Justice who pennpd the opinion IN the case al
luded to, he has the pleasure of a personal ar
Quaintance lie is iongs omniu,n ,nrr;,nvs sed |
etidn Jupiter GliGuaMdo nuiat. That tribunal.
and even he. may have erred Rowan would |
it his brethren had united with him have re-
versed tliP Judgment OF he eOurt below, and
thereby afforded to the appellate court of the !
nation an opportunity ofreconsiderinc this very
important question. He is unwilling to sur |
render any portion of the sOrereign potrer Of
his state upon the first summons Indeed he |
Is not prepared TO say that be should feel hini- |
self IOuud bV the. rpneatsd decietnn. of th.t