New-York tribune., 1868-04-09
APPENDIX.
OF THE CARRIAGE CASE

| Uylton he States, Dallas. III
II IS undoubtedly 10 the loose dica of the judges in
this case. the effect that capaton tax and tax on
land a.e the principal IL not ne only dilgct taxes Ti1
in the meaning Of the Constitution that the general ac
quescence IN the unappOrioned income tax is IN great
degree attributable. The as follows: HyIt0n
kept l25 chaTios they We're taxed y the Ihleu tatt
aud the Supreme Court held that the tax was indirect
aDDortonment Tie decision Of the particular he
fore the Court probably correct IL Is Impossible
self and his family only 10 ride In; although he IL
stated the report OF the 20 have kept them Tor ms
is presumed that the use referred to was me
conveyance Of passengers for hren other words that
the rs Charios pertaned line Of stage coaches III
could charge II all over 10 his passengers by making
slight addition TO their fare But although the decision
stated TO have been correct positions taken. In the
opinions OF the Judges delivered On the OCCASION which
IL is assumed though Judge Chase careful dsclam
giving o2hH1& m & on tat P0 ave- nny nI tSo 70
captatiOn or poll tax simply without regard 10
property profession OF any other circumstance ana
Judge Patterson first sruCE the Constitution sQuarey
is radically wrong; 1t cannot be supported by
any solid reasoning" He then went Oh 10 comment on
the observations OF counsel that Congress may select IN
the different Sttes digtret articles or ObecS from pheh u
raise Ue dppOrOned sum-" aud he said "he 'ded IS
nore What shall land be taxed In one state slaves In
another, carriages in third and horses IN fourth, or
shall several Of these be thrown together IN order TO levy
and make tue quotaed sumf The scheme Is JaieVnL"
Judge Iredel said -" such arbitrary method OF
farng different States differently isd sUggestiOn altogether
Point blank against these assertions oppose the state
| ments OF the men who made the Constitution ana VINO
fully explained its meaning. III the debate oil the pro
vision of the Constitution relating 10 direct taLatio Ia
allotted 10 state may be levied without difficulty
according to the plan used by the state In raising s own
supplies" V Elliots Debates, JO5) Mr. Ellsworth was
NOT only member Of the Federal Convention but he
OF the Committee OF Detail appointed by the Conyen
tion to draft the Constitution He had been member of
Congress nnder the Confederation, and participated
| in the important debates in that body on the
subject Of taxes. In the above lucid explanation
OF tie Intention OF this the Constitution he
IN fact only giving authoritative Interpretation OF the
own and that Of the other learned men on the Committee
OF Detail with HIM On the morning OF the very day upon
as ChiefJustce OF the Supreme Court OF the United
states Had he participated In the proceedings nc might
have cOncurTed I'm the decision, but would have been
impossible for him 10 acquesce IN the dcG oi the Judges
FOR they in direct contradiction to the proceedings
of the Federal Convention, and 20 his official
position OF the meaning OF ths provision OF thc COhttu
tiOu; but he excused himself RON taking any part on the
What were the plans used by the different states at
that tme I'm raising their own supplies, according 10
which Mr. Ellsworth SAID direct taxes. under the con
stitutiOn could be inpOsedf Ihey were very dissmlh
Maryland they were imposed the OF property,
real and personal with certain exceptions In some
States all the stock taxed In Others II was
NOT taxed al ALL while in Others still part Of the stock
was as Virginia. and IN other states
eS@e Report Of Oliver wolcott r secretary OF the
Treasury direct taxes 1850 In the virginia C0nven
zion which ratified the Constitution Gov Randolph saiu
OF the direct tax by the General Government III must De
clearly laid on the most productive article il oaon pail
| cular state. We're the tax lad on one UNIFORM
article through the Union It's operation would be oppres
siye on considerable part OF the people till Ello
Debates l2i, I22i Gov. Randolph was on the committee
win Mr. Ellsworth In the Federal Convention appointed
| ~ draft constitution so have two members Of that
coInmittee-tbe committee who drew up the constitution
nakiug the safe explanation OF the clause about dect
ana that explanation ut variance with the inter
| nretatlon OF the Judges In the Hylton case.
The carriage case decided at very early day IN
the history OF the Supreme Court and before that court
had acauTed the high position In the estimation OF e
legal profession and Of the public which IT has since AZ
taned. one OF the Judges, in delivering his opnHon
speaks of II himself discourse;" they all eVince
great want Of knowledge Of tie subject which they ds-
cuss The crude speeches made rom the Deneh IN i
acquired degree Of consideration which they
do ntrinsicay merit. They shine In the borrowed
light shed back upon them by the great intellect which
for many years Illuminated the decisions Of that rlD
trbunslhe illustriOus Marsha-wlth whose grandeur
OF fame naturally associate all ideas OF the supreme
Court.
Fortunately however have the opinion OF John Mar
shall ON this provision OF the Constitution IL was eA
pressed very fully in the Virginia Convention caued 10
raiify the Constitution and IL accords with that OF Mr.
Ellsworth aud that OF Gov Randolph, and IL entirely at
variance with the views which have criticized Oh inc
judges in the IIyltOn
III the debate the provision relating direct taxes
James Monroe had asked: What are the objects OF di
rect taYatoni Will the taxes be laid on land 7
= very considerable part Of the continually