Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1861-04-15
y the decision of Judge Marshall in the case

GLinHr NIX sttSFuG otttto, dCCOTQlDR 10 the CCD'
sus. Tho question arose because tho SscerGl
States-eo-nouine were the words used
whether q territory was embraced in those
terms or not Judge Marshall decided that in
respect TO the territories, Congress might lay
u tax upon the territory or not, that in laying
taxes OH the States the territories might be
omitted but If the tax was laid Upon the ter,
~riturles, it must be laid, according to the cha
ractcr Of the tax, under the onv rule or the
other-the rule Of uniformity or the :ulo Of
apPOrtionment; that there we're but two clas>ei
Of Federal taxes, indirec: and direct The in
direct taxes, embracing duties, iinposts and
excuses, which wore Obliged TO be uniform
throughout the United States; and the direct,
supposed to be cupiiation und land taxes alone,
which were obliged TO be apportioned among
the several States according to the Census
thereof Well now, what limitation is there
in lhatr That tue Federal power, whether it
be primary ard original, Or derlvative, or in
other words, whether it be Congressional Or
territorial, cannot lay taxes without unitormi.
ty, or apporlionment, throughout the United
StGt.S-.erri.ories being part Of the United
Sta,es-ths na.ps United States, in the Ian
guogo Of Judge MARSHALL, being but tlIs name
Of the great Republic" By these words
"~lhroaghout the United States" he decided
territories were embraced.
You canno. Icy un indirect class OF taxes
without making 1t uniform, nor the direct
without. being aPpoct!oaed and both equal to
all the several States. II ore is taxed, so all
must be taxed eiLher uniformly or apportioned.
r. the property touched by the Tax lid 10y
federal power is touched in the Territories, 50
it mlsl be touched in the States; and i! persons
nro touched by the direct tax in Territories 50
they uluat he proportloustely touched through
on! the Uniled States if touched in one
State, so property and persons must b., touch.
ed i'll all the States; and the result Of The whole
Is that the federal power o, taxation car be OK
he exer!cd BY Congress alone. They luust lie
leid by che primary and original p0wsr-by Goa
g7ess. Whyf Because tie Territorial power,
merely derirativr, il g local power. and cauno,
apporEion throughout the United States; be-
Cause the Territorial power is q local power,
and canno! control unifjrnity throughout the
United States, Congress alone having the pow.
er 10 control uniformity aud to apportion
Throughout the United States. Congress, and
Congress only. can lay q tax direc. or Indirect.
The CONSEQUENCE is that when the Northern
States would impose u capitation tax upon ne
grocs in q Territory, they would be DBL ged IL
lay it upon only three fiiths Of the slaves, and
upon the heads Of every one Of the whites OF
all the several States. That is the protection
under the prl sent Constitution, sir; that is the
Limitation that they cannot tux the heads OF
Negroes in The terr.tGrics without taxing tho
white heads per capitu throughout the United
states. Now tell me whether there is no lin
itatiou in that: and better protection 10 that
than in this Peace Conference proposal, which
must have been made either in gross ignorance
or with the design to pervcri the Constitution,
and deprive US Of the perfect protection II now
aft ,rdS.
Mr.. BALDwIN-Mr. Chairman, | feel that l
have CONC into collision, upon exceedingly un.
equal terms, on Il subject like This, with 4 gen
,leman whit has written 2 book upon il
Ex-Gov. WlsE.-les, sir; md l should like
to have n pupil to instruct lin in his \ Il G.
Nr. BALDWIN, have Ito doubt he would,
and such Z pupil as tina; | should suppose
would lie about the one be would like to teach.
Great laughter
M. Chairman, | do not propose To deiain
The committee by the discussion OF this law
question. | "ill simply State my view in re.
gard ~ IT, There are NO kinds OF taxes that
can be laid by Congrcss-indirect taxation,
such US q tariff was required to he uniform
every where, rs YOU can see very obviously il
should be. Then there is internal or direct
taxation, either a cari,ation tax, or . tax upon
property. To that tux the Constitution does
not attach The condition Of uniformity, but
only says THAI the amount shall he limited as
to each State by the proportion Of its represen
lntion in the Congress OF the United States
That is the only limit The law Of uniformity
applies in terms only to propositions for lndl
rect taxation. The law Of apportionment is
oily applicable TO tile States, and the Qles.
tim cannot produce any decision going further
than that. The case u Lnughborough, to
which he refers, is 4 case where 1nly one point
is decided, ard that is that Congress is hot
bound to lay direct taxes within a territory,
hut If they DO SO they Wu,t apportion them as
il il were q State, ard the corrclsiure point
that il Congress lays 4 'urif that tariff must
he uniform in lis application to States ind
Territories.
Mr.. WIsE-Isc e I shall! nave TO give my pu.
::t uno!:er Lesson.
NJ. B~ALpwN-TeTy we'll. lhope / shall De
able to 80 through ii with becoming diligence
and humility. (Laughtcr) But mere is another
dllemuin. Some gentlemen regard The use OF
tee term persons held 10 service or labor by
the Peace Conference, Us ia bad faith, rs dc.
~lusive, As Il Black Republican trick, designed
TO give that party the power in the future 20
asslii US Dir. Chairman, what is the history
Of the use Of tho term in the Constitution,
persons held 10 service or iuborf' 1t was
introduced into the Convention that framed
-, = lL.l ,,,r ,. ~, 10th . Ian
delegation, who applied the term incorporated
into i.r Constitution u slaves. Instead Of cali.
ins lflem slaves, Mr.. Butler, Of South Carolina,
moved in that Convention 10 Gull them persons
held 10 service or labor" And, sir, it is only
u ~luotlcrln DOCTRINE that slaves are regarded in
the Constitution az property. Now, it is
charged as an evidence OF great unsoundness
70 tho South to call slaves in their constitu-
tlonal sense anything but property. We hear
Uien denounced MS abolitionists who dare to
speak of what ere designated in the Constitu
ton as persons held To service or labor as
linen with heads on their shoulders ! was
glad to hear the gentleman from Princess Anne,
IMr. WISE bear his testimony to the ancient
construction Of the Constitution, that slaves
are persons persons to be represented, persons
10 be taxed, persons in all respects, subject only
to regulation az persons by the Government Of
tho United States.
Why, sir, when it was proposed to stop the
Interstate slave trade under the authority Ct
Congress TO regulats what was The
refuge Of the SOUTH The South said "tiAlt
slaves arc not property under the constitution
d the United States. They arc property among
ourselves, hut in q constitutional sense, in the
sense in which they are treated in the ~constitu-
tion Of The United States, they are persona; the
commercial power does not extend to persons,
and we, therefore, claim exemption from the
exercise OF such a power" Yet, here. upon
this luor, the Black Republican party is assail.
ed. and the acticu of the Peace Conference was
assailed by one, Of its members, in Civ
ing a history Of it to his people, simply because
they used the constitutional language Of per
SEES hcld 20 service or labor" Well, sir, ] do
not wish to delain the Convention 10y going
into suy protracted discussion Of this matter;
| have been led into it farther than / would