The Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1877-1885, 1881-05-20

| From the New York Commercial Advertiser
The suit of the Liverpool, New York
and Philadelphia Steamship Company
against the commissioners of immigration
of the state of New York, for the recovery
of 81 900, 600 paid as head moneys on Eu
ropean immigrants transported here by the
company, came on in the United States
| circuit court before Judge Shipman to day.
| This suit is the sequel to historical legisla-
| ton begun over thirty years ago. In 1S49
| the imposition on head moneys on immi
| grants by the states was contested as I'M
constitutional. The most eminent counsel
| IN the country were enlisted one side
or the other, Daniel Webster, Rufus
Choate, D. B. Ogden and John Van
Buren, being engaged at times in the
case. The United States supreme
court Chief Justice fancy, and all the
Associate Justices except Nelson wrote
elaborate opinions for or against the con
stItutIonallty Of the tax. The highest
courts of New York and Massachusetts,
had both decided in favor of the tax, but
the United States courts reversed them
and declared the tax unconstitutional. as
an infringement of the Congressional
prerogative to levy imposts on imports.
The Supreme Court so decided, however,
only by majority of to A. The State
of New York then passed a law requiring
ship-owners to give a bond for every
passenger against his becoming public
charge as a pauper, idiot, etc, or else to
pay the head money as before. The New
York Court of appeals likewise declared in
favor of this law, but the United States
Supreme Court in 1876 pronounced it also
unconstitutional after argument by ex-
Judge Emott, of the New York Court of
Appeals, against, and ex-senator Berrian
in favor of its constitutionality. In 1877
the present suit was brought for the re-
covery Of the moneys paid under the latter
act. In 1878 congress passed an act vail
dating the collection of all such head
moneys. and declaring that no suit should
be maintained for the recovery Of any
moneys so paid and collected"
On the argument of the case, Messrs.
Alexander & Greene argued for the com
pany that it was entitled to recover the
money, first, as an involuntary payment,
and secondly, as made under mistake of
foreign law by the plaintiff, who was
a foreign corporation. 1t was also ro nY
tended that the act of congress cuttihS Oh
plaintiff s suit was unconstitutional
On behalf of the commissioners OF emil
grafton, Messrs. Lewis and George n, San
ders said that the head moneys were ley
led and expended for the benefit OF the
migrants anu NCIC CoiitCItu W tIC StCalh
ship companies. and the companies
had no equitable claim to the
money; that the companies paid the
money voluntarily, no process having been
issued against them to compel payment;
that the payment was made here to be eX-
pended here, and ignorance of law could
not be pleaded any more than as to the
voluntary payment of any other Illegal or
excessive duties; that the act of Congress
validating the collection of the head-money
tax was constitutional, because the consent
of Congress was all that was lacking to
render the tax valid in the first instance.
Judge Shipman decided in favor of the
Commissioners of Emigration, that the act
of Congress validating the tax was con
stitutiOnal, and dismissed the cOmpanys
complaint.
The company will appeal to the United
States Supreme Court
The amount involved in this and other
similar suits is over S2,000,000