, 1873-02-17

ot"1Hteu thhs tlo supreme U0urt had simply said
TINT tho State could not enact a law that would
prevent tho salo of such imported property, but
lid not touch upon tho right to tax It. Tho
Boston AsHossors, therefore, continued thoir tax
on imported goods. Within tho Inst year, how
evor, tfloro Inns been another decision of tho
Supreme Court, tho language Of which la un-
miatakablo. 1t Haya that "goods imported
from foreign country, upon which tho dutieH
and charges at tho Custom House hayo been
paid, aro not subject to State taxation whflst
remaining IN the original cases, unbroken and
unaold, in tho hands Of tho importer" The
court adds further that "goods imported do
not loao thoir character as imports, and become
Incorporated in tho mass OF property OF tho
State, until thoy hare passed from the control Of
sho importer, or boon broken up by him
from their original caeen." 1t was after
this decision was rendered that tho Boston Az
aoasors admitted TINT thoy were acting at va
riance with the law, and published their circular
calling upon Congress topass now Law enabling
thom to continue thoir old practices.
By their 1ater action, tho Boston Assessors
ignore the Constitution Of tho United States a.
offoctually as thoy have dono heretofore. They
evidently believe that this instrument Inns no
power over Congress-. In ono place the Oonati-
tuition says that "no State SHALL without the
consent of Congress, lay any imports, or dutica
on Imports or exports, except what may be abso-
4ntely necessary In executing ita inspection
lava; and tho not proceeds OF all duties
and imports laid by any Htato shall
DO Tor tho - uao Of tho Treasury Of
tho United statos." #, thcn, Oongresa
should give its conHent, Boston or Massachu-
aotta would simply DO An agent to collect tho
duoR Of the Unitod States Government. But, in
another section, the Constitution expressly pro-
Videa that tall duties, imports. and e1ciBes shall
be uniform throughout the United ssatoa," If
tho faci1itios for importing were equal
throughout the country, Boston would not,
probably, find any objection from other empori-
urns to her policy Of burdoning her merchants
with IN extra local tux, and thus disabling them
from aolling upon oquAl terms with importers
elsewhere. But tho cities and States Of the In
land havo no disposition to submit
to any import taxos which arc not legal, as
they arc forced to buy through tho seaport
otiea, and would oventua11ypay tho taz thus illo-
gnlly levied. It is tho general opinion Of tho
Western people that they are alroady paying
enough royalty on imported goods provided by
tho United States tariff, without tho accumula-
ton OF q local taxation. II tho Boston Board Of
Assessors will not view tho matter in this light,
perhaps they may DO induced to recognize the
forco Of tho constitutional provisions.
In commenting upon this display Of ignorance
On tho part Of the Boston Assessors, Mr. David
A. Wells takos occasion to point to It as an IN
stance Of tho lack Of information md
principle upon which the systems Of
local taxation arc usually provided.
Ho regards It also as nm indication Of the inius-
tico and impraoticsbiuty Of carrying out syatem
OF local taxation which assumes It to be noces-
sary to assess every description Of property tan
gihla or intangible, in order to establish IN
equality OF taxation. He says that the local
taxation OF England, which was formerly main
tainod On auch basis, Vas only remodellod upon
decisions Of the Courts, and not in answor to
popular demands. Mr.. Wells thinks that this
will be the history Of tho necessary changes in
tho local taxation Of this country.