The times., 1899-11-08

pnthE Against the Carriers.
/ Among the cases set for argument this
week in the Supreme Court is that Of VIII
! liam Crawford, appellant, against William
/ S. HubbaI, Treasurer of the Adams Ex-
press Company This is a test case 10 set
tie the question whether a common carrier
or its patron shall pay for the stamp which
the war revenue law requires attached TO
every form of receipt Crawford is the
representative of the Merchants Associa-
tion of New York, and thus indirectly of
the shipping world. while the Adams Ex-
/ press Company is bearing the brunt Of the
present litigation in behalf Of the express
1 business at large.
The action had its origin in an effort to
compel the express company to accept
/ packages for transportation without re-
quiring the appellant either TO provide or
/ to pay for a revenue stamp in addition TO
/ the usual or ordinary charges-those exist
/ ing on, and a long time before July /, 1898.
/ The first argument was before Judge La
/ combe Of the circuit court of the Second
/ circuit, and the suit was dismissed by him
| without taking the briefs so as to facili-
| tate an early hearing on appeal The cir
| ried up, certified to the Supreme Court OF
the United States two questions, which
cover the whole ground of the express COM
pany's defence:
Court of Appeals Decision.
First, does the war revenue act of June IS,
1895 impose upon the carrier exclusively the tax
! represented by the stamp 10 be attached to each
bill oi ladlng, manifest, or other evidence of re-
ceipt required to be issued TO each shipper OF
goods accepted by the carrier for transporta-
tlon' or docs II impose the tax merely upon the
transaction OF the shipment, leaving II to be
paid Indefinitely by either party thereto?
Second, II the war revenue act Of June 13, 1898,
does impose such tax exclusively upon the car
Tlcr, does II preclude the carrier who is by such
act required 10 issue to each shipper a bill OF
I ladlnE. manifest. other evidence of receipt,
/ IRON relieving itself Of the expense Of sffxing
/ and canoeing tine stamp required 10 be attached
/ to such bin Of adiug. manifest or other
/ dence OF receipt?
| Judge Lacombe's decision, though ad-
mitted by him 10 be the result not of ma
! ture reflection, but only Of a first impress
/ sion and delivered chiefly for the sake Of
getting the case out OF court is evidently
+ regarded by the express interests as pre-
/ sumptive forecast of the decision of the
/ Supreme Court This theory is Offset, how
( ever, by the circumstance that another
1 case involving the same question, the
American Express Company against May
! nard, comes up on appeal in precisely the
/ reverse order. the Supreme Court of the
! State of Michigan, where it began, having
/ through Justice Long given Judgment
! against the carrier. These contradictory
I decisions after equally able argument,
! put the main questions at issue squareIy
/ on all-fOurs before the Supreme Court Of
| the United States and may well leave the
/ lay mind in doubt as to the result.
sympathy Against the Company.
The carrying companies being few, how
! ever, in comparison with the multitude OF
their patrons, popular sympathy leans
| largely toward the side of the latter; but
! disparity Of numbers is not The only ground
/ for this preponderauce. The plea Of the
! companies in both the lower courts was
! that, in the absence of explicit provisions
/ TO the contrary, the purpose Of Congress
must be presumed to be TO diffuse the bur
! den Of taxation as widely as possible. and
! that this purpose would be defeated if an
/ extraordinary burden were laid upon A spe-
! cIal occupation or class OF persons. But in
/ view of the license taxes imposed by the
! war revenue act upon bankers and brokers.
/ amusement managers and other special
! classes il is obvious that Congress was
! not aveTse to class taxation Of itself. or
( else il would have laid similar burdens upon
! dealers in such luIuTies as lace and Jew
/ those who supply the community with the
/ necessaries of life. Or not 10 20 outside
! of the stamp tax schedule, take the case
! OF the sleeping car companies which are
required 10 attach stamp 10 GaCh ticket
/ Here we have condition analogous to that
! Of the express companies. for the car com
! panies are common carriers and berth
! comes as near TO being necessity. in
! these days OF universal night travel, as
! the use OF express Hsportation If the
/ express companies are sincere in their ar
gument that We're they compelled to pay
! the stamp tax, they should be allowed to
/ difuse the burden among their patrons by
! charging an extra cent for each service
| what becomes Of the fact that the sleep
/ ing car companies. which at first threat
/ ened revolt are now paying their stamp
! tax and yet selling tickets at the ola
| prices?
The Purpose of - Ongress
It appears as if Congress had made its
! purpose plain enough by requiring a re-
/ ceipt to be given by the carrier in an
! cases, under pain Of considerable fine
| and requiring the attachment OF stamn
! to each receipt. Until the receipt is ten
! dered to the customer II cannot be deemed
TO have been issued and unless it las
! stamp attached II cannot be regarded as
/ complete. In other words, the elements in
! the transaction with which the war reye-
/ nue. act especially concerns itself are all
! preliminary to the transfer of the paper
/ from the hands of the company to the
| hands Of the patron. The common law
| makes it obligatory upon the carrier TO
| accept a package brought TO it, if the usual
and ordinary fee for transportation be
rendered at the same time; the statute
| requires the issue Of a receipt and the
| attachment OF a stamp to il; but no law
common or statutory requires the ,us.c-
mer TO touch the receipt even with the tins
! Of his fingers; he may leave it lying on
! the counter if he chooses
The Issues
The issues in controversy in the express
cases must not be confused with those
which were raised while ago with respect
to the telegraph companies. for the provi-
sion for stamping telegraph messages is too
plain IN terms TO be misunderstood by anv
one The tax on kilograms is a perennial
| nuisance in practice but 1t is a nuisance
| which must be patiently endured because
| its right 10 exist is beyond cayi The
| telegraph companies tried to strengthen
their case by the cumulative argument
that as their average charge for a mes
sage IS less than 80 cents one-cent
stamp on each message would be a tax