Source: http://www.carsandracingstuff.com/library/government/339US542.php
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 20:18:22+00:00

Document:
PASSENGER SEAT OF 1/30 OF A CENT PER MILE TRAVELED ON MARYLAND ROADS.
PRIVILEGE OF USING THE ROADS.  PP. 544-547.
EACH CARRIER WITHOUT RELATION TO ROAD USE.  PP. 545-546.
NOT BY THIS COURT.  PP. 547-548.
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND.
JUDGMENT BELOW IS AFFIRMED, P. 548.
MD. - , 64 A.2D 284.  THE CASE IS HERE ON APPEAL UNDER 28 U.S.C. SEC.
AGAINST THE FORMULA, NOT THE AMOUNT.
USING STATE HIGHWAYS "IS NOT A FORBIDDEN BURDEN ON INTERSTATE COMMERCE"
UNLESS "UNREASONABLE IN AMOUNT."  MORF V. BINGAMAN, 298 U.S. 407, 412.
PORTIONS OF THESE THREE ROUTES ARE 9, 41 AND 64 MILES RESPECTIVELY.
CARRIERS DOES VARY SUBSTANTIALLY WITH THE MILEAGE TRAVELED.
APPROXIMATION RATHER THAN PRECISION."  HARVESTER CO. V. EVATT, 329 U.S.
IN EXCESS OF FAIR COMPENSATION FOR THE PRIVILEGE OF USING STATE ROADS.
THIS MARYLAND TITLE TAX LAW IS WHOLLY INVALID HOWEVER APPLIED.
CARRIER WHO CHALLENGES A STATE LAW.  CLARK V. PAUL GRAY, INC., 306 U.S.
THIRTIETH OF A CENT PER MILE TRAVELED ON MARYLAND ROADS.  MARYLAND ANN.
FN2  SEE CASES COLLECTED IN NOTES, 75 L. ED. 953 AND 92 L. ED. 109.
FN3  SPROUT V. SOUTH BEND, 277 U.S. 163; INTERSTATE TRANSIT, INC. V.
COLLECTIONS CITED IN NOTE 2, SUPRA.
HINGED, SEE NOTE, 92 L. ED. 109, 119-123.
LIABLE FOR THE STATE TAX WAS A NONRESIDENT DRIVING THROUGH THE STATE.
503.  SEE ALSO THE OPINIONS IN EDWARDS V. CALIFORNIA, 314 U.S. 160.
FN6  SEE NOTE 1, SUPRA.
WEIGH NUMEROUS FACTORS WAS THE INDIANA TAX UPHELD IN EAVEY CO. V.
LINES V. PUBLIC SERV. COMM'N, 23 F.SUPP.  865; SEE ALSO MAURER V.
..  ANND SIMILAR ITEMS ..  "   49 CFR, 1947 SUPP., SEC. 182.5220.
WHOLE OR PART ON MARYLAND HIGHWAYS, WHETHER THE VEHICLE BE NEW OR OLD.
THE ENTIRE PROCEEDS OF THE TAX ARE DEVOTED TO ROAD PURPOSES.
OF TRAFFIC REGULATION.  INTERSTATE TRANSIT, INC. V. LINDSEY, 283 U.S.
PARTICULAR APPLICATION OF A GENERAL PRINCIPLE.  CLYDE MALLORY LINES V.
TOO, MUST STAND THE TEST OF REASON IN RELATION TO THE COMMERCE CLAUSE.
ROAD USE WHICH THE STATE AFFORDS AND FOR WHICH IT MAY EXACT A RETURN.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WHAT IS DEMANDED AND WHAT IS GIVEN BY THE STATE.
TAXES BASED ON MILES OR TON-MILES HAVE ENCOUNTERED NO DIFFICULTY HERE.
CO. V. WOODRING, 286 U.S. 352.
ACTUAL USE.  COMPARE INTERSTATE TRANSIT, INC. V. LINDSEY, 283 U.S.
183(NO ALLOCATION OF PROCEEDS) WITH CLARK V. POOR, 274 U.S.
IGNORED AND AN ANNUAL TAX MAY BE BASED ON HORSEPOWER, HENDRICK V.
AERO MAYFLOWER TRANSIT CO. V. BOARD OF RAILROAD COMM'RS, 332 U.S. 495.
LIMITATION UPON STATE POWER ANNOUNCED IN INTERSTATE TRANSIT, INC. V.
OPINION DISREGARDS MCCARROLL V. DIXIE GREYHOUND LINES, INC., 309 U.S.
PUBLIC SERVICE COMM'N, 295 U.S. 285, 289.
CLASSIFICATION WAS REASONABLE ON THE FACTS BEFORE IT.  MORF V.
600; AERO MAYFLOWER TRANSIT CO. V. BOARD OF RAILROAD COMM'RS, 332 U.S.
WHICH A RETURN FOR ROAD USE MAY BE MEASURED.
THE STATE'S RIGHT TO IMPOSE IT.
THE BASIS OF SUCH A ROAD TAX NEED NOT BE INTRINSICALLY REASONABLE.
FAMILIAR PRACTICALITIES IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF LAW.
DECIDING FISCAL FAIRNESS TO EACH INDIVIDUAL CARRIER.
EXCESSIVENESS IS TO BE DETERMINED.  REFERENCE IS MADE TO INGELS V.
STATE'S DISTINCTIVE CONTRIBUTION FOR THE CARRYING ON OF SUCH COMMERCE.
NO SHOWING THAT THE TAX LEVIED HERE IS EXCESSIVE IN THIS SENSE.
MAY IMPOSE SERIOUS DISADVANTAGES UPON THAT COMMERCE.
FALLING UPON INTERSTATE COMMERCE REMAINS CORRESPONDINGLY SMALL.  CF.
A STATE'S POWER TO IMPOSE.  CF. CENTRAL GREYHOUND LINES, INC. V.
BOTH TAXES COMBINED IS LESS THAN THAT OF TAXES HERETOFORE SUSTAINED."
THE MARYLAND TAX COMPARES IN AMOUNT WITH SIMILAR TAXES IN PRIOR CASES.
HAVE SOME BASIS OF APPRAISING THE VALIDITY OF THE AMOUNT.
HUDSON COUNTY WATER CO. V. MCCARTER, 209 U.S. 349, 355.
THIS HAS ANY BEARING ON THE CASE.  CF. SPROUT V. SOUTH BEND, 277 U.S.
OF A CARRIER IS NOT GOING TO HURT IT.
INTERSTATE MOTOR CARRIER AUTHORIZED TO OPERATE ONLY ON A FIXED ROUTE.
HARRISBURG AND SAN ANTONIO R. CO. V. TEXAS, 210 U.S. 217, 225.
INTERSTATE CARRIER.  SEE 277 U.S. AT 164.
OF TAXATION OF FROM $20 TO $200, AND THAT IN HICKLIN V. CONEY, 290 U.S.
WHETHER THE AMOUNT WAS REASONABLE.  SEE APPENDIX, N. 3, POST, P. 561.
FN7  THE MARYLAND COURT ESTIMATED THE "USEFUL LIFE" OF THE BUSSES.

References: V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V.

 V. 
 V.

 V. 
 V.

 V. 
 V.

 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V.

 V. 
 V.

 V. 
 V.

 V. 
 V.

 V.

 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V.