The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-10-16
NO STAMP IS REQUIRED
Naturalization Papers All Right
Without Them
A DECISION IS RENDERED
The Interior Department Makes q Rul-
ing In the Case-Attorney Gen.
sral Nolan Reviews the

IutcInal IcNtnuS StdInp u TtQolICo ou
copies Of naturalization papers. This
has been a matter of dispute, IL being
claimed by some that a 10-cent stamp
Is required on each paper issued. II
this were true. IL would invalidate some
500 naturalization papers which have
been issued here since the revenue went
into effect and the election might be
contested on these grounds.
In order to settle the matter. Clint
Clark. clerk of the district court. tele-
graphed the department of the interior
asking for a decision. The following
telegram was received yesterday in re-
ply:
Washington. d. c., Oct. Is. 1885,
Clinton Clark, Clerk Second Judicial
District Court, Silver Bow County,
Montana: Copies of naturalization pa
pers are not taxable under the internal
revenue laws. G.. w. WILSON.
Acting Commissioner"
The following extended opinion on the
subject was received yesterday by Mr..
Clark from Attorney General Nolan:
Helena, Mont, Oct. II. 1sss.-Clinton
Clark. Clerk. Butte. Mont--Dear Sir:
Your favor Of the 18th. asking for a
construction of the war revenue law as
to its application in the matter of is
suing certificates Of naturalization. Is
at hand. Similar questions arose in
many of the states during the life of
the stamp tax act. which was enacted
during the war of the rebellion.
Section IL of the present law pro-
vides as follows: That all bonds.
debentures or certificates of indebted
ness issued by the officers OF the United
States government. or by the officers
of any state. county, town. municipal
CnrnOrafinn or other Hnrnnrqfipp pxer-
cising the taxing power. shall be. and
hereby are, Exempt from the stamp
taxes required by this act: provided.
that IL is the intent hereby to exempt
from the stamp taxes imposed by this
act such state. county. town or other
municipal corpora tions in the exercise
of functions s~trictl' belonging to them
in their ordinary governmental. taxing
or municipal capacity
II believe. however. that without any
express declaration such as Is contained
in section IL of this act. the burdens of
this revenue law could not be imposed
upon the state or any of its sub-divis-
ions. The revenue act of July 4, 1864.
REQUIRED stamps to be placed upon
writs and other process issued out of
state courts. The question as to the
constitutionality OF this provision came
directly before the supreme court Of
Indiana in the case Of Warren VS.. Paul.
90 Ind, 276. and the court said:
But conceding for the purpose of
this case that congress may lay and
collect stamp taxes, we hold that they
cannot be laid. by that body. on pro-
ceedings in the state courts. This
question is not entirely new. II 1897
congress passed a stamp act. The point
was then made hat congress could not
wen require a license for attorneys to
practice In state courts. but might to
practice in the United States courts:
and the law then enacted respected the
rights of the states i'm these particulars.
Rent Deb. Vol. 2. p. 81: Story's laws of
United States. Vol. 1. p. 1866
state governments. as we have seen.
are to exist with judicial tribunals of
their own. This Is manifest all the way
through the constitution. This being
so. those tribunals must not be en-
croached upon or controlled by congress.
This would be incompatible with their
free existence. 1t was held when con
gress created a United States bank.
and Is now decided. hen the United
States has given bonds for borrowed
money. that as congress had rights TO
create such fiscal agents and issue such
bonds, IL would be incompatible with
the full and free enjoyment OF those
rights to allow that the states might
tax the bank or bonds: because. IL the
right to so tax them was conceded, the
states might exercise the right to the
destruction OF congressional power. The
applies with full force to the
exemption OF state governments from
federal legislative interference.
There must be some limit to pow
er of congress to lay stamp taxes.
suppose a state to form a new or to
amend her existing constitution. could
declare that II should be void.
unless stamped with a federal stamp?
Can congress require state legislatures
to stamp their bills. journals. laws.
etc. in order that they shall be valid?
Can IL require the executive to stamp
all commissions? II So where is he
to get the money? Can congress COM |
pei state legislatures to appropriate 1t?
Can congress thus ~subjugate a state
scarcely be pretended. Where, then.
is the line of dividing power in this
particular? Could congress REQUIRE
voters I'm state and corporation cleo
ions to stamp their tickets to render
them valid?
Under the old confederation con-
gress legislated upon states, not upon |
the citizens of the state. The most i'm |
portant change wrought in the govern
ment by the constitution was that leg
islation operated upon the citizens d. |
rectly. enforced by federal tribunals
and agencies. not upon the states.
Another established constitutional
Principle Is tnat the government OF the |
United States, while sovereign within
it's sphere. is still limited I'm jurisdiction
and power to certain specified subjects.
Hopkins VS.. Jones. Post. p. $40.
Taking these three propositions
then IL Is true:
"Ffrst-States are to exist with in
powers and institutions
within their spheres.
"Second-The federal government is
to exist with independent powers and
Institutions within its sphere.
'~Third-The federal government
operates. within its sphere, upon the
people in their individual capacity. as
citizens and subjects of that govern
ment. within its sphere of power. and
Its own officers and institutions
as a part of itself.
Taking these propositions as true.
We say. IL seems TO result as necessary
to harmony OF operation between the
al HAN A~1