Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1863-05-01

| hla To indirect, the distln ct,0n between tneeo
two species uf taxes is one Of great prsctlcal
inheritance. Indeed, at this tins 1t has become
vital. For the trainers Of the CONSTITUTION
,ooked for revenue almost exclusively TO aD-
tics and imposts, while we are compelled TO
,ooL fl, it almost exclusively cl,ctrhsre.-
siocs the msin relisnce upon which depend
snce was placed by them is gone, it would
not be surprising TO find in the Constitution
some lnsdequacy to fulfil the necessary ends.
Some lameness and want Of adaptation might
reasonably bs expected, and it might have
been wiser perhaps to very the terms OF the
Constitution, and enlarge, fortiiy and render
explicit the grants Of power looking to other
modes of raising revenue than du'ico upon
imports. However, although not unattended
with some difficulties, We believe the tell s
Of tho grant, the construction Of thes' terms
both cotemporaneous and subsequent--'hs
decisions of the Oourts-and the action oo'n
of the United States and the Confederate
Governments, determine construction " hich
furnishes the needn't power to meet tho exl-
gsncy; and, which, it is too late to vary upon
sny Just principle of construction.
What, then, is the meaning Of the terms
udirect taxes" as distinguished from md
rsctq Where lies the true distinction
We venture to affirm thst no just and con-
sistent distinction has ever been drawn be-
tween them, and 10 doubt whether any clue
will guide the inquirer entirely through tho
mazs; uncertainty and misapprehcnsion'
seems to be the rule peryading the debates
in convention, the action OF Congress, the spe-
cu,,tions of commentators and statesmen, ana
syen the decisions of the courts. And yet,
enough can be cleaned from those sources
though not very consistent, to relieve the
mind from apprehension lest the only avail
able means of revenue may have been cut of
by too stringent constitutional pro7iston'
and the Oonfederscy left without the means
| of supporting the government and providing
| for the common defence,
The terms employed in the Constitution
are not such as have perfectly accurate and
| well defrcd meaning. Tho most generic
word is tares-embraciDg all modes OF ra's-
ing revenue. The words duties, lNposIs
and eycises are all used, and perhaps are all
moro or less elastic in their meaning, ard
convey different ideas to different minds and
| at different periods. The words duties ana
| imposts are usually regarded as nearly sy
nonymous. In the debates in the Convention
| which framed the Constitution, Luther Mar
tin informs US that the question was asked
of the committee OF detail "what powers
we're meant 10 be vested in Congress by the
| word duties since the word imposts extended
| to duties on goods imported, and, by another
part of the system, no dusies on exports were
70 be laid In answer to this inquiry we arc
informed that it was meant to give the Gene
raj Government the power CT laying stamp
duties on paper, parchment ard veilum
Elliott's Debates: p, 36S.
Imposts hsye been defined to be snxsa Oh
things imported OF exported, CT duties On
goods paid first by importer or exporter
Excises-Taxes On things for sale, and on
License to sell dutios paid by domestic
seller.
Dutias-Thc same as imposis; by some do
fined as moro generic IN ito meaning, covoflhs
imposts and certain other taxes bosideH,
Whom the tax was laid upon carriages in
1894 ii was callcd "a duty upon csrriages.'
50 much in regard to the phrhssology and
meaning Of other terms used, showing
that tho limitations upon their meaning are
not vary precise. In regard to the dIst'no-
ton between direct and indirect taxes, some
have considered "duties, impoats and ez'
oises'' as belonging to the latter classindirect
and all otaers to be direct. Under this con-
struotim "tsxos' aud "direct tsyss' are pre-
oissly equivalent in meaning.
This view, however, is in direct OPP
position to the decision Of the .'u'
prems Court already quoted-and from
which other matter, yet moro explicit
might be furnished For Chase. Justics, para
phrases the clause, in order TO show how the
Constitution would read upon that construc,
ton, viz: Congress shall have power to
lay and collect direct taxes, and duties. i'm
posts and excuses"
The distinction between direct and indirect
has been BY others held the same as between
specific and ad ralorem taxes. A specific tax
upon things without regs'd to value, rs upon
land per acre, or stock per head, being re-
garded as direct, and any tax according to
value, indirect. This view also 10 settled by
the court to bs erroneous. For the tax then
in question was specific. Upon carriages,
ten dollars each, without roIard to value)-
vet the court hold it to be an indirect tax.
Others have supposed it TO lie in tho mcde
of raising the tax-by quota or reputation
from, the S:ato and not from individuals. No
sllusion is made, however, in the decision to
any such distinction.
Yet we will again venture TO say that no
other mode aside from poll taxi can be
so apportioned, except, this very nlude OF
direct acquisitions upon the States, as used
under the old articles Of confederation This
mode is susceptible of such apportionment,
and perhaps some confusion 81 the old 'ye-
tenn with the nsp may lilo at the bottom OF the
whole difficulty. The phrsseology-"appor-
toned among tho Statss''-sssns apt in this
view, and somewhat singular on any other.
1t may be we'll to refer now more definitely
to the decision in the case of Hylton vs. the
United States, Wheaton 80 or 3 Dallas Ill.
In the year 1894, June 9Th, an act was parsed
entitled san act to lay duties upon carrisges
for the conveyance of persons" imposing q
tax of al0 each upon sll such carriages The
-.EI;4- e tho anh 1uaa hrnnn hf intn nuaation