The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-04-17
Holding There Was Nothing In Reve-
panies Shifting Burden Of Taxes.
HARLAN AND MKENNA DISSENT
TAKING A DIRECTLY OPPOSITE
VIEW OF THE QUESTION.
Texas Negro Given Another Chance
for His Life-kentucky VIII Case
Victory for Mrs. FIeischmann.

| WASHINGTON. April 1s-The Supreme
Court to-day decided the cases involving
the tax stamp as # applies TO express
packages, the question involved being
whether the shipper or the carrier shall
pay the stamp charges on packages The
opinion was handed down by Justice
White and was favorable to the express
companies. There were two cases before
the court involving the question at issue.
but the opinion was based on the case of
the American Express Company VS. At
torney General Maynard. of the State OF
Michigan. The cases came 10 the Supreme
| Court from the decision of the State SUI
preme Court of Michigan, which decision
was adverse TO the claims of the express
| companies. The opinion to-day reversed
| this opinion.
The original proceedings in this case con-
sisted Of a prayer for a mandamus COM
manding the company to receive packages
| for transportation by express and TO
| issue a receipt with stamp duly Cancelled
without seeking to compel shippers TO pay
| for the stamp. The express company con-
tended that the question as 10 who should
pay for the stamp was one for adjustment
between the shipper and the express COM
pany. 1t was alleged also that the company
had in effect but increased its rates on ex-
press shipment by adding to the previous
rates the sum of the stamp tax. 1t was
| contended that there was no inhibition in
the act of Congress against this increase.
Justice White, in MS opinion. said that
ii was unnecessary 10 consider whether
| the law forbids the express companies from
| requiring the shipper TO furnish the receipt
stamp since it would not be decisive OF the
cause even IL IL should be conceded that the
act imposes on the comnany the duty of
paying the tax. 1t was essential, he said,
also to ascertain whether the act forbids
the company from shifting the burden OF
the tax by means OF an increase of rates.
The whole decision therefore, turned upon
the construction of the law on this point.
Quoting the section of the law imposing
the tax upon express company receipts,
Justice White said: There is nothing in
this provision which by the widest con-
lecture can be construed as expressly for
bidding the person on whom the taxes are
cast from shifting the same by contract
or by any other lawful means"
Continuing. he said the contention on
behalf of the shippers amounts to saying
that the act is not merely one for levy
ing taxes. but is statute determining
that the burden must irrevocably continue
to rest upon the one on whom IL is primarily
placed. "The result follows" he continued.
'that all contracts or acts shifting the bur-
den and which should be otherwise valid
become void. To add by implication such
a provision to a tax would be contrary to
its intent and be in conflict with the gen.
erai object which a levsTing OF taxes is
naturally presumed to effectuate."
The opinion also disposed of the conten-
tion that the tax should be imposed upon
the express companies because they are
common carriers and therefore should bear
their share of the burden OF the tax .sCn-
questionaby,' he said this point, "a
carrier is subject TO the requirement OF
reasonable rates, but question OF the
unreasonableness of the rates charged
arises on this record or is at issue in this
cause" For these reasons and others given
the decision OF the Supreme Court Of the
State of Michigan was reversed.
The case of the Adams Express Conn
pany. coming to the court from the Cir
cult Court OF Appeals for the Second cir
cult, was also decided in favor of the COM
pany.
Justices Harlan and McKenna dissent
ed from the opinion of the Michigan case
on the ground that "the war revenue act
imposed upon the express companies the
duty not only OF affixing at its own ex-
pense the required stamp upon any receipt
issued by fl TO a shipper. but OF canceling
such stamp" -
Justice Gray handed down the opinion OF
the Supreme Court to-day I'm the case Of
Seth Carter VS.. State Of Texas. Carter is
a negro under indictment on the charge
OF numbering another person OF his race
He moved to quash the Indictment on the
ground that. Notwithstanding one-fourth
of the population was OF the colored race,
no members OF that race were included In
the panel He asked leave 10 Introduce
testimony TO this effect. but the petition
was not granted. the court overruling the
motion without making any Investigation.
tanned the trial court on the ground that
no evidence had been offered on the point
raised The justice said that this was
false assumption. inasmuch as the testi-
mony had been rendered. BY this tender
Carter had saved his rights under the
Constitution; hence the decision was re-
versed and the case remanded-
The Supreme Court to-day finally de-
cided the contention over the terms OF the
will Of the late Thomas ". Means. OF Ash
land. KY. Mr.. Means left an estate valued
at $4,000. but before his death he advanced
sissoO0 10 assist his son. William Means.
who was then president OF a hank IN Gin
cinnati. which had failed. Mr.. Means had