The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1899-04-07
Over Remains of Unknown Dead From Cuba
andPorto Rico at Arlington Today.
PAY OF THE CUBAN SOLDIERS
Depending on Action of Cuban Assembly-Our Officials Tired Waiting
for it t. Surrender Muster Rous-Administration Giving Atten-
ton to Selection of a Representative on Samoan Commis-
sion-This Commission Likely to be Formed-.Eng-
land Going Slow-Supreme Court Sustains
Tax on Exchange Sales.

tiff, in error, VS.. the United States. The
cases all come from the Chicago federal
courts. These cases involve especially
the validity of the tax provided by the
contracts to sell merchandise upon ex-
change boards Of trade or similar
places. The war revenue act requires
a memorandum to be made of the tran
sactions and a stamp affixed, the
amount OF which is measured by the
value Of the sale.
Three cases present all the phases
involved in stock transactions on the
board OF trade of Chicago. The case
of Ingwersen involves the question as
to whether the Union stockyards at
Chicago, is An exchange or similar
place making sales there taxable.
The court in it's opinion sustained
that the stockyards is a place similar
to an exchange, making it's transac-
tons liable to the tax.
The, case was argued by eX-Secre-
tady Carlisle and Mr.. Robbins, Of Chi
cago, for the petitioners, and by Mr..
J. Il. Richards, solicitor general, for
the government. Mr.. Carlisle contend
ed that the tax upon sales on exchanges
is a direct tax; first, because a tax
Upon sales is virtually a tax upon the
property sold, and, second, because the
tax cannot be shifted, but must be
paid by the seller on the exchanges. 1t
was also insisted that if the tax is an
indirect tax it lacks uniformity, be-
cause not imposed upon all sales when
ever made.
The point also was made that, if an
indirect tax, it is a stamp tax on docu-
ments and that congress a no power
to require a written memorandum to
be made upon transactions within a
state for the purpose of taxing such
memorandum.
The court in it's opinion carefully
discusses all these objections and over
rules them. 1t holds the tax is not
a direct tax, but "a duty or excise
taxed on the privilege, opportunity or
facility offered at boards of trade or
exchanges for the prosecution of the
business mentioned in the act"
"It is" the court further says, mot
a tax upon the members of the ex-
change nor upon the membership there
in, nor is 1t a tax upon sales generally.
The act limits the tax to sales at any
exchange or board of trade or other
similar place and it's fair meaning is
to impose a duty upon these privileges
or facilities there found and made use
Of"
The exceptional facilities offered at
such places affords, the court says, a
just ground for the classification for
: purposes of taxation by ongress Of
! acter of the taxing power and the pos
sibility of adapting it to changed con-
dftfons is described by the court, it is
distinctly holding that in order to tax
a privilege or facility enjoyed, it is not
necessary that it should be created by
the government. The requirement of
] a memorandum is upheld because it is
necessary for the collection of a tax.
The tax is pronounced uniform because
it applies to all who enjoy the special
J privileges or facilities incident to the
transaction of business at boards of
trade and similar places.
In the matter of the petition for writ
of habeas corpus, the petition was de-
MED, while in the other cases the judg-
ments Of the circuit and district courts
were affirmed.