Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1865-09-21
TAKING u. &. BOMBS.

pending contest is making the taxing
Of United States Bonds or Stocks an
issue, and, upon the specious plea that
all property should be taxed equally,
they claim the whole policy Of the
Government upon this subject should
be changed, and also that the pledges
of the Government to its creditors shall
be repudiated. The 14th resolution of
the platform Of the VALLiNDIGHAM
wing of the Democratic party is in
the following language:
"l4lh. Resolrcd, That We mo trxplicitly
condemn the policy Of the party in power,
in creating thousands Of millions Of Govern.
ment dcDt and attempting to eS0ncrato the
holders thereof from all obligations TO pay
their lust proportion of taxes toI the sup
port of the State ia which they reside and
thereby creating an odious and privileged
moncyed arlstocracy; and we declare it to
be the immediate duty Of Congress and the
State Legislature to use all the legal and
constitutional power they possess to subject
money so Invested to Il burden Of taxation,
equal to that imposed upon other property
for Federal, Stnto and Municipal purposes. V
Here we have an unblushing effort
at deception, in the attempt to create
the impression that the party in power
have originated the policy of exempt
ING Government Bonds from taxation,
when the authors Of the resolution must
have known that, long before the party
in power had an existence, this question
had been settled by the Supreme Court
of the United States, and the "odious
and privileged monied aristocracy
created by its decisions.
We shall briefly refer these very wise
fnanciers and sticklers for the taxing
of Government bonds to few of the
decisions that have been made upor
this subject, and ask them to fight tho
former "Democratic Supreme Court
and not the party in power, for the
"odious aristocracy.
In the case of Nc Calloch Va. TN
State Of Maryland, "a WHEAroN's Re
ports, 316, where the question raise(
was the right of State to tax brancl
of.the U. S. Bank within its limits, th'
whole question of taxing United States
stocks and securities was ably discuss
ed by DANIEL WEBSTER, WILLIAA
Writ (Attomey- -General) and Mr.
PlNcKNEY for the plaintiffs in error, ant
by Mr. HopKINsoN, Mr.. JONES and MI
MARTIN (Attorney General for tn
State of Maryland) for the defendant
The opinion of the Court was deliy
cred by Mr.. ChiefJustice MARSHALL
in which he reviews the arguments o
both sides Of the case, and uses thi
language:
eff the States may tax one instrumer
employed by the Government in the exec'
tlon Of its powers, they may tax any an
every other instrument. They may tax tf
mail; they may tax the mint; they may ia
patent rights; they may tax judicial pvoces
they may tax all the means employed |
the Government, TO an excess which wou
defeat all the ends 0i the Government.
This was not intended by tho Americt
people. They did not design to make tn,
Government dependeut on the States.
The Court has bestowed on this subje
is most deliberate consideration. The +
suit is conviction that the States have
power, by taxation or otherwise, to retar
impede, burthcn or in any measure contl
the operations Of the constitutional laws G
aeicd by Congress to cary into exocuti
the power vested in The General Govci
ment. This is, we think, the unavoidnl
consequence. Of that supremacy which I
constitution has declared. !
In the case Of Weston, et al. VS.. T
CITY Oounct Of Charleston r PETEl
Reports, 440, the question of the rig
ofa State TO tax stocks or bonds of
United States was directly in iss'
where the city Of Charleston, un(
authority granted by the State OF sot
Carolina, in its charter to levy tax
undertook to tax Government six a