The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1852-03-20

casss, tbat ~ He he not bsss clearly dsa u
between III copmaeeial power Of the Union and
the municipal spognr Of Slate and that the
circumstances Of each case must necessarily
furnish suis applicsbIs to ITSELF "A State
cannot regulate foreign commerce.. but it may do
maay things which more or less affect it, II
may tax . ship, OF other vessel used in CON-
merce, the same as other property owned by it,
citizens. A State may tax the stages in which
the mail is transported hut this does not regu-
late the conveyance Of the mail any more than
taxing ship regulates commerce. And yet, ia
both ins'ances, the tax ON the property in some
degree affects its use."
The constitutionality of State law imposing
a tax on property brought from foreign nation
or sister State il not impaired by showing that
il thwarts the policy of the geQeraI government
unless it was in conflict with some provision oil
the Constitution. or of law of Cong ess passed
pursuant to the Constitution. This was ono Of
the obj ctions to the license laws Of Mnssachu.
sets, Rhode Island and New Hampshire, air. ady
referred TO-; yet these laws were held TO be con-
stitutional by the unanimous opinion of the
court though they evidently tended to diminish
importations of spirtuous liquors and lessen the
revenue from that source.
In the license eases, Chief Justice fancy said,
that the power Of Congress 10 regulate com
merce, "does not extend further than the reQu-
laton of commerce with foreign nations and
among the several States; and that beyond
these limits the States have never surrendered
their power over trade and commerce, and may
still exercise it, free from any controlling power
on the part OF the general government. Every
State, therefore, may regulate it's own internal
traffic, according to its own judgment, and upon
its own views Of the int. rest and we'll being of
its citizens. II il unquestionnbly no easy
task to mark by certain and definite line the
division between foreign and domestic com
merce and to fix the precise point, in relation to
every imported article, where the paramount.
power of Congress terminates, and that Of the
State begins. The Constitution itself does not
attempt to define these limits. They cannot be
determined by the laws Of Congress or the
States, as neither can by it's own legislation en-
large its own powers, or restrict those of the
other. And rs the Con .titution itself does not
draw the line, the question is necessarily one for
judicial decision, and depending altogether upon
the words of the Constitution.
"This question came directly before the court
for the first time in the case Of Brown Vs. the
State of Maryland, IL Wheaton, 4I9 And the
court there held, that an article authorized by
law of Congress to DO imported, continued to
be part OF the foreign commerce while it re-
NAMED in the hands of the importer for sale, in
the original bale. package or vessel in which it
was imported; that the authority given to import
necessarily carried with il the right to sell the
imported article in The form and shape in ,ohich
il ,oas imported and that no State, either by d.
rect assessment, or by requiring license from
the importer b. fore he was permitted to sell,
could impose any burden upon him. or the prop
erty imported, beyond hat the law of Congress
had itself imposed but that when the original
package was broken up for use or retail by the
importer, and also when the commodity had
passed from his hands into the hands of pur-
chaser, it ceased to be an import, or part Of
foreign commerce, and became subject to the
laws of the State, and might be taxed for State
purpo 9 :, and the sale regulated by the State,
like any other property"
The Chief Justice added" In the nature of
things the line of division is in some degree
vague and indefinite, and do not see how it
could be drawn more accurately or correctly, or
more in harmony with the obvious intention
and object of this provision in the Constitution .
1t was admitted that ga State may impose a
tax upon its citizens in proportion to the amount
they are respectively worth; and the importing
merchant is liable to this assessment like any
OtH~l CltiLci uHu 10 nCCOIuttlH W lIlc
amount of his property, whether it consists of
money engaged in trade, or Of imported goods
which he proposes to sell, or any other property
of which he is the owner. But tax of this de-
scription stands upon a very different footing
from tax on the thing impo ted, while it
remains n part of foreign commerce, and is not
introduced into the general mass of property in
the State"
These citations law down as clearly as posi-.
BILE, the powers of the federal and State govern.
ments, in the imposition of taxes on goods i'm.
ported. 1t is conceded that the power of the
States, in respect to them, must be taken to be
such as they were held to be in Brown u.s. the
State of Maryland, in respect to the mporta-
tons from abroad Thus far Congress have
legislaed under the authority Of the Constilu-'
ton. But we are not aware that thas attempted
to regulate imports or exports from one State
to another; consequently, goods brought from
one State to another, become subject to taxa.
ton by the legislature of the latter at least, as
soon as they are sold or change owners, and
this whether they are unpacked or are sold in
the form in which they are introduced
1t will not be denied that the controlling and
supreme power over commerce with foreign ma
tons, and among the several States, is granted
to Congress by the Constitution. But until
congress acts upon the SUBJECT the power Is
dormant 1t has acted but in part, and thus far
and no farther, controls the legislation of the
States.
The regulation by Congress of commerce
between the States, is certainly power to be
exercised with studied decacy. There is none
which would be watched with greater jealousy
by the States. An enactment authorized by
this power, it 10 admitted, is paramount to the
Legislative act OF State coming in conflict with
it. But until Congress acts, the whole field of
Legislation is open to the States, just as it was
previous to the ratification of the federal Con.
stitution; and the question whether, when, and
to what extent State will act is one Of sheer
policy.
Congress never can legislate so as to interfere
with the internal trade of State, or restrict
the right of one State to tax goods brought
from another and sold or otherwise disposed
of within its limits. The right of taxation in
respect to such. goods, is unquestionable; and
its denial can only be maintained by an unauthor.