Mexico weekly ledger. (Mexico, Mo.) 1855-1956, 1899-02-02
AN IMPORTANT OPINION.
Judge Hughes on the Powers Of the
Federal Government-A Test Case
During This Term Of Court.

A question OF unusual Importance
was submitted to Judge e. M. Hughes
at this term Of the Circuit Court.
When petition for suit is filed 1t is
the duty Of the Clerk Of the Circuit
Court to issue q writ for the defendant
and to accompany the same with q
certificate stating that the writ and
petition delivered to the officer to be
served upon the defendant is a true
copy Of the original petition filed and
original writ issued. This involves,
as a matter OF course, the making OF
q certificate by the Clerk.
The late internal revenue law, pass
cd Tor the purpose OF raising revenue
for the Spanish- American war, pro-
vides that any certificate required by
law shall be stamped with ten cent
revenue stamp and provides that such
certificate Is void unless 30 stamped.
In order to test the matter motion
was fled at this term OF the Audrain
Circuit Court to quash the return Of
the Sheriff on the ground that the
certificate OF the Clerk made In the
cause did not have on 1t a revenue
stamp.
Upon the question being presented
to Judge Hughes, he held that It was
either not the intention Of Congress
to require stamp upon certificates
Of judicial character, or II 1t were
60 intended by the revenne act, then
it was unconstitutional; that In the
lsormation OF the Federal constitution
the States did not delegate TO the
Federal government the power Of
taxation over Its officers or courts or
any other Of the machinery neces-
sary for the support and maintenance
of the local State government; It was
never intended that the power to levy
tax upon the State government or
fts officers should be lodged in the
Federal government, for the power
OF taxation necessarily carries with it
the power to burden or destroy, and
il the Federal government had the
power to levy tax upon a State
court, or the officers Of that court, it
would have power to destroy the
courts and all Of the machinery for
the necessary preservation of local
self government.
This seems to be in accord with the
rulings Of the Supreme Court of the
United States, for at q very early date
similar questions arose under the ex-
else acts passed by Congress, as under
the excise act passed In 1854 to gain
revenue with which to carry on the
civil war.
Construction of the Federal consti-
tuition is being fast removed from the
domain Of politics, and q new iuris-
prudence unknown to the world be-
fore the adoption of the Federal con-
stitution--namely, constitutional con-
struction--is becoming as fixed in itl
rules OF Interpretation as any other
branch or any other department Of
Anglo American law. There Is NOT
that conflict between the State and
Federal courts that was In existence
at an early date, and the people are
beginning to learn that through the
Federal courts there is that same pro-
lection for the individual citizen az
through the State courts, and we are
glad to have an object lesson Of this
here 10 our midst. 1t 10 more than
probable that the view taken by Judge
Hughes that Congress never intended
that the acts Of q public officer Of q
State should be taxed is the proper
one to take Of this law; but whether
that be the view or not, it seems to
be settled beyond controversy that
the Federal courts and State courts
are In harmony; that they will never
permit Congress TO levy a tax upor
the machinery Of the State govern
ment.