The Cordova daily times., 1916-11-23
JERSEYS RIGHT TAX MOTORS TESTED
 
 

l authorities and motorists generally were affected in the suit challenging The constitutionality of New Jersey motor vehicle license laws of 1903. | lt presented for the first ouestions l of whether state has authority to :, raise revenues for maintaining state roads by imposing automobile license taxes ,and whether automobile pleas are touring is interstate commerce. Although the supreme court in January. 1915, by unanimous opinion upheld Maryland's motor license laws Us not burdensome upon interstate commerce. the new questions were raised i'll an appeal by Frank J. Kane. New York citizen, from conviction 'f violating similar New Jersey laws.
 Beth Maryland and New Jersey statutes impose graduated automo- bile license tax, upon both residents
 nd non.residents, based upon horse power
 In the New Jersey case. however, he state authorities admitted that the state legislature proposed to raise re venues for maintaining state roads by means of the licenses and that such saNes were not solely for administra- lion costs Of regulation and registra- ion of motor traffic, as was the case
 n Maryland.
 New Jerseys courts held that the
 afsing Of money by such licenses n1 New Jerseys roads and not upon the achicles themselves, as direct pro- iertE tax - was clearly within the states police powers to compensate it for improvement Of and wear and tear upon the highways. Wane, how aeer. contended that the courts opin-
 on ill the Maryland case merely up leld law not designed for revenue purposes and that the New Jersey "eeeauc raising law was void as dis Hliminaters and a state burden upon interstate commerce..
 Upon the question of whether motor pleasure touring is commerce" in defending kane's suit the New Jersey authorities contended that commerce fs more than mere pleasure" and that Kane could not successfully attack the New Jersey laws as he was convicted of their violation while merely tour ing through Paterson to Delaware Water Gap, Pa.
 The New Jersey state attorneys eontended that license tax is not I property tax and that the New Jer- sey laws impose license taxation, with registration of resident and non-resi dent motor vehicles, not as tax upon the vehicles themselves. but merely lpon their use and operation on New Jersey highways as a toll.
 Exemption of horse drawn vehicles from taxation in New Jersey was at lacked by Kane as unreasonable dis crimination against motor users. The states attorneys eontended that ab- normal wear and tear caused upon roads by automobiles makes the ex- tended that non-residents have no le- gal right to free use of other states roads. Another feature of the New Jersey laws attacked by Kane was : requirement. upon nonresident motor ists. in registering. to designate the New Jersey secretary of state as their agent for service of process in legal i proceedings caused by operation of their vehicles.
 The New Jersey law imposes licen- ses of 8 for automobiles with ten horsepower or less; s for ten to 1 twenty-nine horsepower. and $lo for i more than thirty horsepower. Non- residents are. like natives. required to register and pay the licenses. which are lower than the Maryland fees up held by the supreme court, and may also secure limited license good for driving only tnot applying to the ve- hicle itself) for twenty-four hours within the stete. The annual automo-
 bile license revenue in New Jersey
 was said to exceed s250.0oo.
 In the Maryland case. the supreme 1 court upheld the graduated horse
 power license tax was valid and not burdensome upon interstate commerce
 in the case of non.residents. the court
 stating that. in the absence of iegis-
 lation by congress, the states may l exact compensation. If reasonable and uniform, for the use of their roads.
 The American Automobile Associa- I ton and National Automobile Cham Der of Commerce were represented in
 the arguments before the supreme lcourt in October. 1916.