Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1849-05-01
VOLUME XLN.-NUMBER ]04.


And tas brings me back 10 the question WIZ
Their alien passengers II, m a foreign country ale
imports. | bavr Already discussed that question,
and need not :rpsat what have said. Most
CLEARLY Ia my up.Gio1 ttey are MT inpurs; aud
/! they ale nui, thea a'corG'rs 10 The auhofntS
,eieflet TO- The Slale has "a risht 70 lax hen-
their authority 10 lax hi bang aSrI'sed IN any
respect by me power N The Genrral Goveramen.
10 regulate CONNIE &c. >ay nothing as 10 Is
being tonnage du,y, iof afhonsn menluncc IN
the argument, ! do no' suppose any reliance could
have b-en placed upon il.
IL is said that this is a tax upon the Cap
tain, and therefore . tax upon al instrument ol
commerce. According 10 he uttorites before
referred 10, II IL were lax upon the Cap
tam, j, would be no objection TO II, unless Il
were Indirectly duty on imports CT Tonnage
UnaIrslIonsby a tax or the Captain Of ship
bringing IN mere aGdlze, would he indirectly a
tax Oh imports, and consequent, unlawful BIT
his being an instrument OF commerce and Dsti-
CATION, does not make II 80. For tax upon The
Instrument OF commerce IS not forbidden. In
deed taxes upon property IN ships are continual
" land, and their validity never yet d, ub ed =
And 10 maintaln that tax upon him IS ihvald,
1t must first be shown that he tax was indirect
ly TAX upon imports
But although ms money is demanded OF the
Captain, and required TO be paid by him or his
owner before the passenger /, latded, II IS IN
10 proper and legitimate sense of the word
tax upon hun Goods and merchandise cannot
be landed by The Captain until the dunes upon
them are pad or secured lie may # he pleases
Jay The Guty without waiting for HI owner or
consisne~. SO here the Captain if he chose
might pay the money and Obtain The privilege OF
la ding his passengers without waiting f'r hls
owner or copsshcc But he was un3er no Oh.
legation 10 do it. Like the case of cargo, re
could not lrnd his passengers unlil il was done.
Yet the duties demanded in the former case
rave never been ,uppos d 10 be tax on The
Captain, but upon Inc goods imported, and II
would be against all anaiog! and against The or
dlnary construction OF statutes, 10 call tins de-
mand tax on the Captain. The amount de-
manded depends upon The number passengers
who desire 10 land. 1t IS not fixed amour, on
every Captain in every ship engaged IN the
passenger trade.
II is no Objection then to the Massachusetts
law 10 say that the ship is vehicle, or the
captain an instrument OF commerce. he TAX
ing power OF The State is restricted only where
the tax IS direct or indirectly duty on IN
ports or tonnage. And The case befuiC us IS ne
first IN which this rover has been held to De SUI
farther abridged by hese affirmative grants OF
power to the General Government. In my luds-
menl this restriction OH the power oil HE STATES
is new rlne III opposition ioihe cohlehlp
raneous construction and The authority OIL aG-
Judged cases AnG II II is hereafter 10 be me law
81 his court, thai The power ~ ftsu'a'e c'u-
meIce has abridged he Iaxlns powers oil ne
States upon he vehicles or Instruments OF Com
1 torn Al
Whether The same prohibition, upon the same
principle may no, be carried out in respect 10
ship.owners and merchandise IN way sefl"us'
ly IL impair The powers VI taxation Whlch nave
heretofore been exercised BY the States.
lcohclude he sublrcI by quoting The language
Of Chjel Justice Marshall, il he case 81 B'lihss
p;. The Providence Bank, in Pet, SOL, where,
speaking upon his subject he say, hat me
taxing power is VI vial Importance maj u IS
essential to The existence 81 government. are
truths which il cannot b" necessary 10 fe'aillfn'
They are acknow edged and asserted oy al. J.
would seem ha the rrlmqnlshment Of such
power i never 10 BE- assumed. We VIII MOI say
mat state may no, reliuqush i; that con>id-
Grafton sufiic,cn " valuable 10 induce partial
release oil u may not exist bu a he whole cnni-
munily is Interested ~ r..tainlns u uniimnishrd
thu, community has right 10 mss, maj us aoan-
comment cushl not % Dc presumed ~ a case IL
which he deliberate purpose OF the stare TO ahan-
don il does not appear"
Such has heretofore been The language 81 ms
court, and ! ran see nothing IN the power grant
Cd 10 Congress III regulate commerce, MAI SHOWS
a deliberate purpose on The part OF me safes WHO
adopted he constitution, Ia abandon any ri2n ~
taxation, cyccp, what is directly prohibited. Inc
contrary appears IN the au'hehlic puoieanoh'
ol the time
Il cannot b, necessary To say anything upon
The article Of the constitution which gives Con-
eress The power Ia establish uni!0im iuie ol
naturalization The motive and object oil nus
provision i, too plain 10 be misunderstood IN
Ter thr cunsli nlion OF he Uned SAFES, citiZrns
OF each Sale are entitled 10 the plvii'grs
and inmunliies II citlZens IN The several ares,
and no STATE would be wiling that another olale
>h.uli deirrmne tor u what l"iei2nef sh"u
become ore ii Us cifiZers. For wnhc NJ ms
provision any one State could have gwen INC
right Of citizenship in every other State Aho
Us every citizen Of State IS also a citlzeh Oh
tre United States, a single State, without inns
provision might have given 10 any number OF
foreigners It pleased the right TO all the Pri''le-
PES OF citizenship IN commerce, trade and navi.
cation although they did not even reside amongst
! rs The nature Of our institution, under Inc Ie-
| ,l,ral government made II matter OF absolute
! necessity that this power should be cohhded 10
| ,he government Of the Union, where all mo
| States we're represented; and where all had
| voice. a necessity so obvious that no statesman
4 could have overlooked il. The article has moth
/ in, TO do with the admission or rejection ot
! aliens nor with emigration, bn with the rights
Of citizenship. lis sole object was TO pre- ent
one state from forcing, upon al the others ana
upon the general government persons as citizens
whom they were WI ling 10 admit 8 such
|, is n oper 10 add that the state laws, which
were under examination ID the nceaSs G ss'' ap
nj ed altogether 10 merchandise Of the d scrip
| ton mentioned 10 those laws, which was I'M
ported into n State from foreign countries or
| from another Stale And as The ST les have no
mower 10 lay a tax nr duty on imports, Inc laws
m question were subject 10 the control OF Con-
gress, until the articles had ceased to be I'M
ports, according 10 the legal meaning OF the
word and II IS with reference 10 such mPor-
talions, and the regulations Of Congress aDd The
States concerning them, that the paramount
power of Congress i, spoken oil IN some OF me
on,nIon. then delivered The question as 10 tne
mower OF State to exclude from ils terri 10 les
such aliens as Il may deem unit 10 resid~ among
its citizens, and T. prescribe The cohd'lohs VI
which they may enter il; or, as 10 'he power
of State 10 levy ats1 for revenue upon alien
passengers arriving from fore On ports, were
nei,her of them involved ~ those cases, ana
were not considered or discussed IN the OPT
Mons
(sENAsprR N sECnSD PAoE.l
MANKIAGEs. Isl.
Married on the - h los. by me Rev WIN
o Earsh Mr.. BENJlMIH q PEYToS OF Char