The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1867-07-21
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.

Reyenuc
Tse Uaaed States vS William Cryt y I'M.
s,d sea. Acr casesMr Chief Justice Chase delr ,ed
ths opinion Of tho Court:-Ihese arV % IN
Der the provisions Of the Internal Revs iu. cots
violating 70 licenses for selling nousrs and deal.
ine a lotteries, and TO special taxes the latter
hcsiness rs U. s. statutes 252. s7a as, sad Il
u. statutes ll6, 1877 Soi-2 Tho ,naes before
n upon Certificate OF division from Croult Court
% tho United States for the Northern district OF
York. II argued Al the las. term with the Eve
cases, which came hero upeo wrs. OF the
Circuit Court Of the DniteA Ssaics n the District OF
Now Jersey During tie present term another Of
she general character comm IRON the Circuit
Cour, for tho District OF Mass chuso,;s has been
argued, with Two sher, liar Except in one
particular TO ths New Y0k ard New Jersey
cases. and coming, hera 1r'incase OF
division from abe Crceii Coart Rr tho Southern district
q New York In P,e irsi casa pessaf a citizen sod
resident Of the SAase New York indicted Tor cell
ting lottery tick ev that Stale without having hr 3D.
essnod and paid Tor Incense sRaor the Internal Revenue
acts OF Com ess Jemnrred 10 the Indictment and
the division Of 0,Don upon she question presented
by the demurrer and joindor In the i've cases from
New Jersey citizens residents OF that State
sseveray nCfc,ei FOR the offence They up by
way OF plea statute OF New Jersey prohibiting the
4business carrying which, without obtaining a
hcense payment Of the required duty, they
indeed THO District Attorney demurred 10 each of
these pleas, In each there a Judgment for
the defendants upon demurrer and joinder. In
,ths case from yassachvs etls the dei.noaDt was
indicted for carrying toe 0usin OF retailing
liquors without license, TO which indictment there
was demurrer. statement OF facts was agreed ON
10 the eject that the defendant retail dealer
charged. end thai tins isuess prohibited by tho
laws OF the common wealth; and the division OF opinion
The greed The general question these
cases "a, Can the defendants be legally convicted
apon the several indictments found against
them ;or not having compned with tho acts OF
Con,rass by taking GU, and payns for me required
fCeDses TO on the business IN which they were
gagged snch business being wholly prohibited by the
laws cf the several states in which il carried ons
In OF The two remaining cases the defendant
indicted FOR beng engaged the business of otiery
dealer, the other for being engaged In the bust
ness D. n lottery ticket dealer New York. without
having pad special tax required by law In each
case there was demurrer and jomder i'll demurrer
The division OF opinion occurred upon the pieadings
and tho question certified is the same in each la
these cases. therefore, the general question is could
the defendants DO legally convicted indictment tor
ooing engaged IN business on which special tax rs
imposed b. of Congress- without having paid such
. SPECIAL tax, Notwithstanding that such a business was
ana Is, wholly prom ted by the laws OF New York Ia
the argument OF all these IL trenuousiy main
tanned by counsel for defendants that the imposition
Of penalties for carrying business prohibited by
bato laws, without payment for the license special
tax required by Congress, contrary to public policy
snd illustrations OF tins supposed contrariey drawn
hypothetical OF the license crime for rev
We VIII dispose OF this objection before proceed
Ing 10 consider the other important questions
witch these cases present Ii is not Deces-
Ary 10 decide -sether or not Congress
prime There are undoubtedly Fundamental principles
Of morality and iuscs which legislature is at liberty
70 d,sregar bu II is &C aliy undoub ed that no court
except clcaros cases, properly mpGte the
disregard Of those principles to The legislature. And II
Is diincuh to perceive wherein the LEGISLATION we are
sailed upon consider Ia contrary To puoc policy This
Court know nothing Of public policy except from the
constitution and the laws and the cours, OF sdmnis'r
Non and decision. II has legislative po crs II
amend modify any legislative acts II
sxamine questions as expedienI or inexpeden,, as
ptc mpolitc. Considerations OF that sort in
general DO addressed 10 the legislature Questions OF
policy determined there concluded here. There
nases, 10 true in which arguments drawn from public
policy must have large influence; but these
which the OF legislation and
policy Is, and in winch VIVA. would Otherwise
DO obscure OF doubtful Interpretation, may be
sissady received and established. The cases before
not Of this sort The legislature has
pose penalties for unlicensed dealing in lottery tickets
and In quors These ensctments 30 long as they stand
snrcpeaed and unmodhcd, express the public policy in
regard the subjects OF them. The proposition that
they are contrary TO public policy 10 therefore contra
Atcaton in terms or 1t 10 intended as denial OF their
sxpsdiency or their proprety II Intended In the latter
ssnss the proposition Is OF which cannot
sake cognizance. We come now to examine more
serious objection to the legislation Of Congress in res
ton to dealings controversy. 1t argued
the defendants In that license TO carry par
culsr business gives authority TO carry IL on; that
tho dealings in controversy parcel the internal
trade OF the state in which the defendants resided that
enc internal trads OF q State subject IN any re-
spsct 70 legislation by Congress, and neither
licensed prohibited by It's authority; thar licenses
for such trade granted under OF Congress- must
therefore be absolutely null and void and
that penalties for carrying on such trade without such
series OF propositions the conclusion
inmates, depend on the postuiaie that license Deces
ssny coners an authority to carry on the licensed bust
But do the licenses required by the OF Con-
grcss for selling liquor and lottery tickets confer any
authority whaievers 1t is not doubted that where
Congress possesses constitutional power TO regulate
trade intercourse II may regulate by means
Of licenses, as well as In other modes and,
In case OF such regulation, license Will give
the lcensee Authority do whatever authorized
as Thus Congress, having power TO regulate com.
with nations aud among the several States
and with the Indian tribes may without doubt, pro
vide for granting coasting licenses, licenses 10 pilots
licenses trade with the Indians and other licenses
necessary and proper for OF that great
extensive power and the same observation applicable
~heh The granting Of licenses may be incident. Ali
ssch licenses confer authority and give rights 10 tue
ltcensee But very different considerations apply the
iatsnai domestic trade OF the States Over
this ana trade Congress has OF rcgu
laton nor any direct control This power belongs ex
the business OF citizens transacted within state IL
warranted by The constitution except such as is strictly
incidental 10 the exercise OF powers clearly granted
BY the legislature The power suthorlze business
within state plainly repugnant to the exclusive
of the State the subject IL true that tho
power OF Congress . very extensive power IL
h given IN the constitution, With only exception
and only two qualifications. Congress cannot
ports and must impose direct taxes by the rule OF
apporIionmeut and indirect taxes by the rule OF
forny. Thus limited, thus only, n reaches every
ssbbec ana may be exercised discretion But /,
rssches only existing subjects Congress cannot author
IT. therefore the ioensss under cousdsra,ion must be
regarded giving authority 70 carry the branches Of
ee-'oes, which .hey license II might os ailcu 4 no,
constitution hut u 10 not necessary 10 regard these
la~s giving such authority. So far they relate
vkhin limits they give none, and give
sese They simply express the purpose Of the gosern.
not sterfers, cy penal proceedings, with the
nominaiiy licensed, the required paid.
Tue power 10 tsx u not questioned, nor the power
70 impose penalties for non-paymcnt OF taxes The
granting Of license, therefore, mast Be regarded
nothrg more than . form Of imposing tar, aud
Of imply nothing except that the license shall be sub
tect penalties usder national law, N he pays L.
fhs construction IL warranted BY practice gov
from 10 orEAnixaion As early ~ lset retail
1eaers wines or In foreign distilled liquors
CURED TO obtain and pay for licenses and them
annually. and penalties were imposed for carrying
the baNpe<s without compliance with the iaw tist
United states statutes 35Ib In 1904 these license
taxes aud the other excise internal tares which mad
been imposed under the sxgencics OF the time being
no Longer needed, abolished. ia United States
slakules. las In lkl3 reyenne from excse aga