The Ouachita telegraph. [volume] (Monroe, La.) 1865-1889, 1870-02-19
No. a..
iFrom the n. O. bulletin.
The Cotton Tax.

-
heeSupreme Court of the United
States, or perhaps will be again,
has lately been argued and is now
awaiting decision. We refer to
the case OF harrington VS.. Saun-
ders, which involves the ccnstitu-
tionality of the cotton tax.
On the part of harrington this
case was ably and elaborately
argued by briefs of Judge: John
A: Campbell, of this city; Judge
VIM. Z. Sharkey, of Mississippi;
Albert Pike, of Memphis; Robert
son Topp, ofMemphis,a and Judge
James Hughes, of Indiana, and
orally argued by p. Phillips, of
washington, and Judge Curtis
1t was contended by counsel
that the tax was, a direct one,, and
not laid in conformity to the rules;
Of apportionment as provided in
Article the First of the Constitn
ton; that it was a tax without
representation; that it did not
come within the rules of uniform,
ity as prescribed by the Constitu-
ton; that if regarded in the light
of an export tax OF. duty, it was
prohibited by the Sth article Of
the Constitution; that. if passed
on the footing of a special or ex-,
elusive tax. without apportion-
ment or uniformity, there was no
clause found in the Constitution
to warrant it; and finally, that the
taxing power of the Legislatiye4
branch of the government did not
confer the right to levy taxes on
the raw productions of the earth
IN one section of the Union, whilst
the productions of, other, sections
were found exempt. Hence it.
was contended by counsel for ap-
pellant, that the act of Congress
authorizing the collection of such
tax was unconstitutional. 4
They showed by the. Agricul-
tural Reports Of 1867, that
ssas s.eR Of that ~a'
sss ssss S s! S S 81
That of these cotton was the
only production on which a tax
had been collected; that all of this
cotton Except one hundred bales
raised in Southern Missouri, and
six bales in Southern Illinois III
had been grown in the eleven|
cotton States of the Union. It]
was shown that the payment of
this cotton tax by the people of
the South had not exempted them
from their full share of every 9TH
er character of tax collected by
the government, and which had
been paid alike, South as we'll as
North. 1t was also shown with
what tenacity the members of the
convention who framed the con-
stitution, strove to guard the peo-
pie of each State against partial
Or unequal taxation. -
On the opposite side the case
was argued by Attorney General
Hoar and Assistant Attorney
General Field.
On the decision of, this case
will depend the future fate of the
South, or any other section of the !
Union that may chance to be in
the minority. Once the princi-
pie is established Of taxation with
out representation, apportionmentl
or uniformity, then the constitu-|
ton fails to perform it's functions,
and is forever gone.
PLAN FOR SETTLING. Contested
ELECTION CAsEs.-The ElectionI
Committee has agreed to recon-
mend to the House a plan for set
Ting contested election cases.
entirely new to this country, but
something like that pursued in
England. 1t is to settle each case
by a special jury Or committee.
The names Of all members of the
House are to be put into a box,
and then drawn out, one by one,
each contestant having the right
to object to any member drawn.
When nine names have been(
drawn, to which neither object,
these gentlemen are to form a
committee for the special case.
The decisions of the committee
.Drsn IN hra l. -