Brown v. Maryland

THE UNITED STATES. OF 419 cases the one directly j Although adjudged applicable ¡537. found, us this decision before have been we do not consider ®r°wn insurance, but new in the law establishing any principle on set- grounded already application principles Maryland a new fled, to combination of circumstances. affirmed.

Judgment

[Constitutional Law.'J Error, Others, Plaintiffs in against The Defendant Error. An act importers all legislature, requiring foreign- by the package, bale or &c. and persons other selling the wholesale, hale, license, same or &c. to package, take out they dollars, shall pay and in ease of or neglect refusal' license, out take such them to forfeitures subjecting certain penalties, repugnant to that provision of the constitution of the “ States, declares, shall, United no State without lay of Congress, consent impost, or or ex- except absolutely ports, what necessary for executing inspection lawsand that which declares Congress shall “ nations, regulate have commerce with foreign among several Indian tribes.” Court ERROR Appeals Maryland. was an indictment in Baltimore,

This Court of City error, plaintiffs second section of against of the State act of legislature Maryland, passed “¡An entitled, 1821, act to the act supplementary du- laying ties licenses retailers of and for other dry goods, pur- ' “ The second section of the act poses.” provides, That all or articles, commodities, importers dry or wares, merchandises, bail goods, or or of package, wine, rum, and other distilled brandy, spirituous whiskey, liquors, &c. and whole- persons selling CASES IN THE SUPREME COURT n barrel, package, hogshead, fierce, shall, bale» sa*ei lore are authorized to they sell, w^-v'*** take out a license as Biown dollars; directed, original for which shall act.is pay fifty and in license, case neglect refusal to take out such Stato of I shall be to the same an forfeitures as arc penalties act, to prescribed by original which this is a supple- ment.” The and penalties forfeitures prescribed by act, were, which 1819, was in a os forfeiture original passed tax, amount of the license and a of dollars, fine be recovered indictment. by

The defendants demurred to the indictment, a having was them, rendered demurrer in judgment upon against Court, affirmed the Court of City Appeals, Court, error, writ of to Ibis the case was brought, by 28th. Feb. Meredith, contended, error, Mr. that' for the in. plaintiffs exercise of the law in was an unconstitutional of did not He existence deny

taxing power incident to As a necessary sovereignty, of such power. several States to the before the adoption belonged them, constitution, however, and it still belongs subject, its exercise upon restrictions imposed para- to the instrument. With of that regard authority imount .these contend, mean to thuf the did not Restrictions, he of the section first contained article of eighth .grant national government constitution, vested any taxation, fie ad- concurrent than power more thing construction, grant mitted rule- power itself, not, prohibition of its exer- Congress imply does (he The granted powers general go- Slates. cise by as exclusive, considered never to be are unless vernment terms, unless, or from so in the na- made express they itself, concurrent exercise must of the neces- power ture or direct But repugnancy incompatibility. sarily produce no means this was the inevitable result he argued, of because its taxing exercise power, a concurrent of being it often nature rendered exercised capable peculiar time, the same and even at authorities different collision interference. without actual subject, , were, alluded he had found restrictions STATES, OF THE-UNITED were both constitution; 337, m of the provisions ¶ The former all were comprised express implied. article, which the States are the tenth first section from lay- unless with the consent prohibited, Congress, Maryland-. oh duties ing any exports, except imposts what their in- for executing absolutely necessary are, laws; consent, also, without such forbid- spection den to effect of this upon tonnage. impose with the of the general grant prohibition, coupled taxing to, before is to referred vest in the national govern- ment exclusive commercial imposts With these, however, country. exception is a collect taxes concurrent lay power. But, like all the other concurrent powers exercise, in its taxation subject, ge- neral restriction which results from the implied necessarily This is the Union. supreme paramount authority n vital and its direct principle system, political opera is to restrain from of tion the States the exercise any power’ to, constitution, or with, incompatible repugnant constitutional laws of national which government. By understood, is to be a our merely growing repugnancy exercise, of a concurrent the same Congress power and a State but that from arise legislature, State, exercise of one a to a with reference diffe- exclusive concurrent, whether rent power, express in the general government. implied, residing stated and illustrated Having the«e as the constitutional insisted, of the limits he taxing by the had been act legislative under con- transgressed section The second all comprises sideration. the provisions law which material to the. are The true' question. of this construction section is doubtful; somewhat upon any however, it from interpretation,- sell- prohibits merchandise without ing first taken out imported having a license so, to do which he is to a required pay stipula- tax. ted is, le- question then this is such law as whether have a colour Under

gislature Maryland righ* pass. 0 license law. he was a contended that this statute palpable

CASES IN THE SUPREME COURT evasion of the restriction the States express “lay duties on indirect do that which importsan attempt constitution has this, said inhibited. And he be- explicitly shown, law, cause that a he'thought lay- might clearly a tax on the ing importer for'lhe the mer- privilege selling law, chandise he himself this and this which is imported, case, to a in all respects, substantial equivalent, differences, since, a few slight unimportant imports, all the effects of answers all produces purposes, such concurrent the States impose duty. are the differences between and a tax apparent .What said, in the first directly place, the one is a tax for the article privilege ofbringing into sell the other a tax for the country, privilege ' these in it is so in. But privileges aftér ing brought connected; sell inci right dissolubly necessary dent to of á right importing. grant privilege value, bé of no unless it import sell. implies sale, Prohibit ceases. He importation necessarily that, on a maintained fair and construction the whole just thé was irresistible. revenue That the system, implication duties exacted were not for general government paid, but for the of im privilege import privilege simply, commodities, and them in porting using way merchandise, might incontestably proved, by showing dutiable, were unless the inten imported tion, and for the of traffic. this view, With purpose he re ferred various the act of March, provisions 1799, (ch. 45, s. 30. 32. 46. 60. and the case o£ 107.) also, This is the English Concor:d.a principle, customs, law of mainly our borrowed.b system remark, It-was likewise legislation Ma worthy this the before ryland, consti upon subject, adoption inwas strict accordance with tution, same the principle, it so far carried as to the the permit merchant try market an actual sale, the duties paying only Cranch, Cranch,

a 9 also 388. See 4 347. 3, Tracts, Customs, b Haleon the ch. 211. Pt. 20. in Hargr. Law m STATES, UNITED

OF THE is, of duty.a There residue free sold, to export portion 1827.- modes these two between then, in this no difference respect n of taxation. at diffe- are payable taxes said that these case, time 'importation, at the times; rent in the one are both other, if paid at But they of sale. the time is a mate- this not surely for substantially privilege, It is a concerns the simply matter that difference. rial collection; but it convenience gives certainty, safety, fact, character to law. In how- point distinctive is not revenue system ever, duty imposed payable, dollars, than until after it is less importation. fifty except to consist in this: A difference said third apparent license charge upon goods, duty import is as much a one charge upon but the upon person; other, an increase their if that meant however, a is, personal charge, actual cost. The import him alone makes is not the bond that upon importer; still bond, he is ; liable without' having given personally duties.b answerable

These are differences in the operation substantial; taxes, two are but they apparent, thrown the law to elude about detection. are the disguise however, test, is, consider the effect of this true law The raise', exclusive grant upon government, revenue reasons for such a imposts. arc grant committed the constitution to objects obvious. of immense magnitude, and

general government require Of ail means. species taxation, that corresponding most fruitful least It is oppressive. sound therefore, to cherish extend this branch of the policy, revenue; because, whenever it fails, other modes of public must resorted taxation to of a more necessarily odious and nature. Now, the oppressive consequence this law on claimed by is, place part Maryland, branch of revenue in her public completely power; so, as she had entirely concurrent right constitutionally 1783, a Hanson’s Laws 36. Act of s. 34. ch. Act 1784, ch. 84. s. 5. b Rep. Mason’s

CASES IN SUPREME THE COURT her, to tax It is means to enable at her imports. pleasure, 1827. laws, annihilate, to license her territory, as it own regards to commercial What is revenues of the ¡prevent country. her from' of foreign prohibiting importation altogether merchandise into increase It is her ports longer bear until will price license the commodity must, the burden, Importation and the end is accomplished. it cease, It is revenue. case, necessarily that are produced these this consequences not pretended this should be not is law; necessary it particular to look exercise of are not at particular case. We power n at is assert much as power principle upon of this law ed. We are not to of the constitutionality judge isit not the degree amount of tax which imposes; instance, determines the taxation, in the particular is, to a de- That the revenue certain right public tax. incontestable, law, is of this affected gree, operation if, .But has a to demand right principle, Maryland dollars as the of a license to sell fifty price imported merchandise, has a she sum for the demand any right words, If, same she within the privilege. pro- per is, of her in its na- taxing sphere power, power unlimited, and she ture, what extent she may carry has tax, A this Court said, power emphatically pleases. it is a case, a In this destroy. power power prohi- ; ac- deprive bit means to government all its conduct objects, important complish great ope- to defeat the intention ; a exclusive rations of commercial revenue. grant has

If to enact laws of fight Maryland description, commerce, she own al- right her regulate though, by constitution, exclusively vested Con- duties is imposition import often gress. resorted to. of revenue, not for the but to purpose commercial regulate countries. intercourse duties, Discriminating duties, duties, are so protecting commer- prohibitory many cial all under These be resorted to regulations. may of license If has a laws. disguise Maryland right pass laws, ones; license she she may pass partial commodities, select their with a and burthen sale particular : license she establish tariff discriminating STATES. THE UNITED OF fpr commercial affect, defeat, the herself, duties exercise the word, she may In one of the country. policy ®r°wn laws, of license means commerce by to regulate her, to tax give concurrent state evade, also, the constitutional pro- thus in this respect .and jhibition. ob- no such looks to said; this law .revenue, there is no and that ; that it a tax for is ject simply other be used for any pur-, that it will ground apprehend fit sub- are not acts for But the motives pose. legislative for be exercised If can the jects judicial inquiry. al- another; one for the intention purpose, may is the concealed. ways effectually principle .It law, attainment and its to be for the exerted capacity to aim at than that which professes objects to look case, that it is and necessary the particular proper de- of this States are authorized to laws to. If the pass which 'induced prohibition scription, purposes defeated, nugatory. and is rendered altogether Johnson, contra, insisted, Mr.

Mr. Taney on did not a and was lay duty imports, law of Maryland of the United States. the constitution not repugnant does not act of tax impose The assembly (they said) nor trade and on the foreign goods, upon the importation But the is imposed importer. tax upon occupation whole- trade and foreign goods by occupation selling been It is a after have tax sale imported. upon they when that trade of trade carried or party, profession It is laid the same on within the State. principle upon retailers, or or hawkers usual taxes on innkeepers, the State. other trade exercised within pedlars, upon any true, are, It is goods by express importers law, of this words, made to the provided provisions wholesale it is wholesale; sell but the selling tax; it is trade subjects. party the tax is imposed. tl'' Does constitution of the United States forbid Mary- land to such tax is the pre- This' impose sented -the record.

Von. 331. CASES' THE ÍJ>[ SUPREME COURT insist, The in error plaintiffs in question on Virtually duty violates that clause in imports, duties, constitution which declares that State shall not lay on imports. Maryland. Wc answer, not, it is either directly indirectly, on A imports. duty is a duty tribute imports paid sovereignty to introduce country permission To goods. in, import, bring mean is, thing.a A duty therefore, a duty in-of bringing act foreign goods of importation. —on for the permission ; to introduce paid them it is the consideration for that given privilege. party to introduce the into the buys United .to them'under laws of place protection liable to the whole becomes He country. duty by very ; same, act of the amount is importation whether sell he goods, keep them for his proposes own them as a present another. use, or give ' have been into a brought State, After the im- goods relation them has one peculiar reason of his porter by He is known to the State Jaws in the being importer. owner, as the or entitled party character the custody receives he degree and goods, of the protection or be the not he importer. whether The pro- it has houses, when through custom is no passed perty, under the exclusive protection United States. longer the laws State —must It is transferred guarded State, with, dealt the laws of otherwise according and in, or and therefore, the act is, brought of im- imported, therefore, op a If, is duty imports portation completed. or means the act permission importation, is law introduce, in. that is question' very'clear, not, directly indirectly, duty imports. “ said, that it is the word But, used as in the imports,” States, the United mean constitution does importa- tion, but means goods imported.

If then constitution 'the interpretation right, 1799,ch. 123, 2, 1 Act of Rep. Mason’s 499. 4 Wheat. March 246. Rep. STATES. UNITED OF THE said, “JVb as if had United States must be expounded shall, the consent Congress, imposts without lay i^v^W ®r°wn if be the true And such duties on imported.” goods can no State constitution, lay then reading State.of Maryland* from article of upon any imported property construction, to this imported foreign country. According furniture, kind, of every property plate, imported imported would be taxation exempt property, privileged used in the-States. For, if the word importsf “ “ constitution, means imported,” imported then States, without the goods,” permission Congress, cannot tax dominion, within their owned property their citizens, has been' introduced provided property from abroad. Such be the inevitable consequence !< word if the words expounding.the imported had goods” been used. The uniform practice States,' the the interests of the commu- principles justice, are all to this construction. nity, directly opposed “ said, But, it is means imports” importation, not the goods imported, yet inse- privilege selling incident parably importation, always implied This import. like the argument, one privilege-to to, will be found to last too replied prove much, to lead that can results in. hardly acquiesced The right derived from import foreign goods United States. duties are the federal imposed by go- vernment, and are paid sovereignty. permis- is conferred sion to,import government, if the to sell is right implied then permission import, the . to sell is derived from right United and becomes an absolute and vested importer as soon as he the .of ; the acquires privilege is, introducing goods as soon he the duties, as or secures pays them, to according the acts of And if the to is a Congress. sell right .vested derived from the right, then this general government, right restrained, limited, be cannot or in regulated, manner any by .then, affected State legislation. importer, having an absolute and to sell, sell in right may unconditional any- in and manner he thinks He place, any offer proper. may. for sale the of a large quantities in heart gunpowder city. IN THE CASES SUPREME COURT and thus the lives of the citizens; he offer endanger may hides, lish, and articles in offen- description, places Brown s¡ve an(j inconvenient to the to the dangerous public, hold an own citizens; health the he auction at his may Maryland.-warehouse, and to tax to State ; refuse the he any may pay retail; sell at he sell as hawker may pedlar; trades, of the States on are laws these taxes impose void, so as is concern- unconstitutional and far the importer ed. These taxes have been some of always imposed by States, and their derive a from these right revenue sources has never before been questioned. said, sell, be

it is.h right auction, to sell wholesale not right by only, by by all, If, however, at cannot limit- retail. exists right ed to sales said' to to the It is be incident wholesale. by and if be to that permission annexed import; permis- sion, then must be absolute and unconditional right: can where we find If the States are qualification disabled from a tax on the sales of mer- imposing chandise, when made the bale or are package, why not unable to tax on the sales equally impose of such auction, retail, made when or in goods any man- constitution 'ner? The gives peculiar privilege any sale; Court, mode and this in particular expounding instrument, will not introduce into it new limitations, and new divisions words. implied power, fine, duties, In either payment importer, sell, well introduce acquires right right Ihe or he right goods, acquires bring merely.__In case, his to sell first would be the reach of beyond control, State In the second case, State regulation. laws and goods subject authority held, It-can State. that an hardly sell importer may and in he any manner if any place, ; and pleases he may not, it is disposition because goods tbe regulations authorities; they they are, subject, liable such consequently, burthens as mode impose particular sale or transfer; and, therefore, liable the tax question. shores,

The cases cited wrecked our can STATES. UNITED OF THE 4°M To import, this on argument. to bear be supposed hardly 1827. of the introduction will, a voluntary an act implies Br”wn are the is, cá'ses, the Besides, question in those goods. what will the not rights payment State to duty liable pay goods are so diffe- ? And when questions of the duty procure can the one how decision rent, it is perceived the other. affect degree . insisted, side, law in. on the other that But, it is that clause in the constitution be not to repugnant question is in on to which forbids a lay duty imports, yet of that clause which violation gives Congress power ob- must be commerce with nations. regulate admits, that served, this that argument argumenli gratia, not, tax in either or indirectly, question:is directly contend, that on But the in error a duty imports. plaintiffs it be not still the tax although imports, is forbidden constitution of States. In the United by maintain, words, section tenth constitution United States is not the one limits of the States and that the taxing power the clause still further curtailed Congress gives commerce. regulate power-to settled Court,

It has been decisions of this does'not grant ¿power Congress, extinguish of the States the same unless legislate right subject, exercises the when the power granted. Congress And. exercised, the States if the whole may.yet legislate, not been covered the laws of legislation ground the Slate law not the United provided repugnant States that of federal these government. Assuming princi- settled, sufficient answer this argument ples to give law gives, professes Congress say, laws referred sell: The revenue the importer, made, cases, certain where sales to, duties charge framed on the certain foreign laws are assumption laws do not sold; will be to be but these permitted in what mode nor out generally, give permission point If, therefore, regu- be sold. under this they may commerce, a right late the importer Congress may give Con- right is not until sell,yet.the given; given CASES IN THE SUPREME COURT gress, and tax the sales without may regulate vio- the constitution of the United States. lating (cid:127) But this in clause the constitution does not to Con- give v. the gress contended for. the constitution power By State of States, United the of taxation the States restrain- power by ed, words, in certain by cases. express

It has been that these limitations of always supposed, in matters of so and revenue, sovéreignty, carefully particu- set down, and and excluded all inference larly implication, left with taxation not the States all the expressly powers clear, denied It is to them section.- in the very restraining constitution, the men and the who framed the people who the so understood it. The Fede- constitution, adopted ralist the must be the opinions considered expressing and out of constitution, friends of both in the the federal and near the conclusion of that Convention; 33, and in No. number, the on taxing power commentary “ is, is thus whole inference from concluded: would, constitution, under the individual States proposed to retain an and uncontrollable raise authority independent in need, revenue to extent of stand may any -they by and taxation, duties on kind imports exports.53 except every Federalist, 33 of the No. and No. And,'throughout as a clear and asserted repeatedly same principle indispu- table one.

But, commerce, if under the reguláte Congress, sell, authorize then certain the. importer important may taxation, besides duties and exports, powers been States. For surrendered if by Congress have may sell, law to the importer right Congress may give by allow made, how sale direct may may import- shall, aiid, to elect mode he whenever er this any pleases; thé done States government, and, such is at an end,' sales to regulate consequently, their then, of taxation If also. be sustained argument, Court, the' regulate' authority “ is not auctioneers retailers independent the distin- as was uncontrollable supposed authority,” a mere Federalist, but is dependent writers guished fo- liable the control of authority, Congress, far. OF UNITED STATES. THE said, may.give reign concerned. goods Congress, . , so, then do may If sell. right Congress the States sale which may cannot tax mode of any Congress Such, were too please powers surely permit. important slo- been in this loose and valuable to have surrendered If were have manner. beén venly given they up terms, would have they express given up been like the and not and uncertain duties by vague imports, Besides, to sell inferences. if may right Congress give manner, any also sell may they give ; States, made and the laws of place the different police health, their Con- of- exist safety only by permission And gress. again, may prescribe Congress terms into introduced but thus sold, shall be country, direct how taxation, the sales from not Con- exempt why may the all gress, upon foreign goods exempt principle, taxation Stales .exercise ex- may the If by Congress after clusive one dominion over for purpose, goods, State, not the same into have béen why brought ? Rea- exercised for exclusive be any purpose power indeed, difference; but we of make might, sons policy new of not now the discussing introducing provisions policy eonstuution, the but ascertain the into endeavouring instrument. of the words used the in meaning error, of in behalf the iu The plaintiff lastargument urged of the the consti- is founded supposed policy objects of used tution, than on the words any rather interpretation said, im- It that if a State may itself. in the instrument it to amount, increase any question, may tax pose al- the States may prevent importations that means and by inferred, And, it is that a of power hence capable together. abused, been was not intended have left so much being with the States. urge can.be more fallacious than

.Nothing possible States, proving abuse for power purpose Such an goes been-taken argument power away. con- all State Such a destruction power. principle for all struction would an end authority; to all State put States cannot be abused. possibly CASES' IN THE SUPREME COURT not to be ought deemed more liable than the federal govern-* meet to abuse the confided to them powers people any supposed-and merely possible inconvenience, nor Gan arise froman State of. use of might improper State power, fur- Maryland. Djsh a groand deciding against existence of the power. must

We be liable to this continually inconvenience from of our character complex government. In the Federal- , “ ist, 32, No. the rule construction thus stated: It is not a mere inconvenience possibility exercise of constitutional, but an immediate and powers, repugnancy, can, alienate implication, extinguish pre-existing 'of right' sovereignty.” possibility inconvenience from the use this not, improper therefore, the existence argument against .of any power, cannot, alienate by implication, extinguish for which we are pOWer contending. indeed, But, it is lay impossible can lead to inconvenience, or can be used to embarrass the of lessen the regulations, revenue federal tax on government. If.the should wholesale dealers be heavy prevent importations, people - will Státe be the sufferers. If it enhances principal the hurthen is at least imported goods, heavy price as it is on the State people citizens of other States, and this furnishes abundant that no security tax will such laid. The of a State vexatiously people cannot ever burthens imposing justly suspectedof heavy themselves, for the thwarting purpose embarrassing go- indeed, If, vernment. of a State people could guilty ©fsuch and other folly, they facilities to might,'by bounties State, manufacturers their own effectually- prevent importation would goods. Nobody deny but possess power; them be- nobody suspects to abuse it. ing disposed is, indeed, There no real of serious dangey inconvenience '

from these The conflicting powers. Isense good good of the will feelings people apply remedy; always confide, we may safely the'State and the governments,- will government, never embark in the unprofitable contest of But trying shall doéaeh other the most harm. STATES,

OF THE UNITED it would tqke if such state should ever things place, had matter been how the boundaries power little very cannot be out The Union decision. by judicial marked of the federal preserved mere strength power forfeit government. as'it dissolved soon shall affection and confidence States. of the

The error, General, for the reply, Attorney plaintiffs stated law, ren be, State whether question, dered it without criminal to and sell import foreign goods, State, of the was permission fission which peri State, obtained a tax to the was by paying repugnant If constitution, laws, and of the treaties Union. had a restraint such Maryland lay power other State every and sale importation foreign goods, be, would must have the same consequence power; both, interfere; that this of taxation power directly, would with commerce, with tax power regulating imposed by ing power Congress. quantum principle could make difference. to tax Of the same as in apply, attempt held, that a States, theCoirt Bank the United where tax, to tax limited the plea power ony was,, 'therefore, and that State; power, sure destroy.a case, two was denied upon

In the present law in exerted first, by'the because grounds; power' na commerce regulating is that Court has several which the tions, and among ' Second vested in Congressb determined to be exclusively on im impost, it was laying because ly, that.of the consent Congress. without ports, law interfered order determine whether present In commerce, it with the exercise regulating to prescribe undertook to see whether it was only necessary fr- be carried on file terms which commerce 316. Rep. Wheat. Maryland, 4 M‘Culloch Rep. b Wheat. Ogden, Gibbonsv. (cid:127) S.5 Yot. XII. CASES liNiTHE .SUPREME COURT States., nations, and If it it* feign were among power Í82?. those terms, was whole prescribe a power prescribe Brown terms. After of its exercise Congress, exclusive terms, for rt certain power, préscribed is incompetent of Maryland, the to add other terms. doubt States Could there any that the exclusive of commerce power foreign regulating, included that of Union to all the citizens prescribing they conditions, ilie and conditions, the whole on. States, for sale shall 'United into the permitted bring ? This or countries consúmption, productions : does them in permission, bring power slop restrain, sale, tlieir or bur- may prohibit mode, in effect, it, then im they their may, prohibit portation. sale, their may prevent If.they prohi they bit their barter or use and exchauge,. consumption effectually de country, mode; in.any ami thus every feat the beneficial exercise of the to. permission import.. The States even confiscate them might order goods, be burnt after ; were landed and this destroyed would no more interfere with the ac importation, than the law' cording opposite argument, now in ques And, asked, tion. it was whether the sagacious statesmen copier constitution framed the meant to ’ who upon Congress so idle and illusory They looked power exercise regulating.commerce .as a great source wealth aggrandizement.a national They looked to it means' as a great developing agricultural and manu resources of the and its country, facturing general industry which the nation instrument by as an should be enriched at home, and rendered capable countervailing commer and rival cial nations. regulations But if. commerce ceases ón the regulating landing and the whole then the goods, delivered'over to of the respective discretion their various views of discordant policy, exclusive exercise partial vain utterly will Congress useless. So of that commerce, existence Very regulating is-so and preserving studiously conferred on Con a The Federalist. No. 1 STATES, OF THE UNITED last plea made depend upon caprice at gress, What of sure of the States. signifies regulation, Brown of the if the States substance thing \may destroy very v. to be of regulated Uniformity, permanency regulation, State of viand, Mar of with a view to the any purpose policy, regárd agri cultural, or commercial of the interests manufacturing, na course, tion, is, of out of as much as if there question, were, Union, or still as it were infected with all the of the former confederation. The same State debility views, exercised short and narrow power, upon sighted the other branch of the exerted as to defeat might that of the States. The commerce among power, regulating free now between the intercommunication prevails States, checked, asimilar bemay effectually requiring license to into of State the import particular productions So, also, States. other what the do as to State imports, may do a license from may exports. may require merchant, thus, and in effect, ex lay duty exporting both and although Congress expressly ports, in the constitution*from such a ; and forbidden laying commerce, of both of whole power regulating ex vested in imports, exclusively Congress. By ports of these two exercise usurped powers, joint a total non-intercourse establish may nations, laws, in direct violation of the Or it the Union. make a

treaties, and constitution nations, or among discrimination different among commerce, their a view States, with discouraging branch of its own internal some industry, encouraging Union, to the exhibited direct policy repugnancy One of the in its and treaties. for con laws avowed objects commerce regulating upon ferring Congress, was that of revenue for the raising national support foreseen, It was of com prosperity government. merce would uniform best con promoted regulations Union; treaties tained laws it was was that foreseen, also that an impost species taxation habits of the American best suited genius people,b b. The Federalist. No 12. COURT SUPREME CASES IN THE one But if now in be.exercised 1R27. source State, and the all; exercised principal bemay bederived, were -of Union from which revenues short, it In to local diverted wilfbe dried purposes.' up, was the constitution insisted, all evils for would be entailed an effectual remedy,

intended provide of such the validity by confirming country, now in as the act question.- laws March12th. delivered opinión Chief Justice Marshall Mr.

the Court. in the Court

This is writ of error to a rendered judgment the City Appeals affirming judgment indictment, Court in that Baltimore, found on an Court act the le- error, violating against plaintiffs founded on the of The indictment gislature “: words And act, in these of which is section second or enacted, of articles com- foreign that all importers ithe merchandise, modities, wares, bale or by or goods, dry wine, rum, other dis- or brandy, whiskey package, &c. and selling tilled liquors, persons spiritous barrel, or wholesale, bale hogshead, same by package, sell, take tierce, shall, before are authorized or they license, directed, as for which out act original or dollárs and in re- ; neglect case fifty shall pay license, to the same out such shall be fusal take origi- forfeitures are prescribed, penalties The indictment which this isa act nal supplement.” error, hi the plaimuTa imported having charges without haying one dry goods sold package them on so. A was rendered against do judgment license act which for the prescribes penalty demurrer is how this Court. offence; and that before judgment on cause whether the entirely The depends question, can of a State require constitutionally importer legislature out a from State, articles take license be- or. be to sell a bale so im- he shall fore permitted package ported. said, that favour

It has truly the presumption h.een act, proof of-every legislative burthen whole lies himon who denies constitutionality. plaintiffs

OF THE UNITED'STATES. themselves, j and insist that take error upon m burthen to two consideration is provisions act under repugnant Biown States. the United in the constitution “ shall, without 1. To that declares that State of Marylan* im- on or duties imposts, the consent Congress, lay any necessary be or absolutely what may exports, except ports its inspection for.executing laws.”. shall have power 2. To which declares that Congress

1! nations, among commerce with foreign, regulate States, and with the Indian tribes.” several 1. into the extent of the u, inquiry prohibition Question first or ex- “to or on duties lay any imposts law',^re- Jhe t0 *®e sPect con- ports.” Maryland The counsel for * J clause prom- t fine this to laws on duties prohibition imposing act importation exportation. The counsel for the plaintiffs fay^gimpost? duties on in error them much wider scope. give ?r the delicate and In important performing duty of our clauses in .constitution country, involve ing Union, of the government conflicting powers ahd of States, it is to take a view proper the lite- respective of.the words to ral of their meaning connexion expounded, words, and of the with other accom- objects clause,' prohibitory grant plished power. “ is the What, then, words, or du- meaning imposts, ?” on ties exports ináports. dr is a

An custom or a levied impost, imports, into and is articles brought most country, secu- usually red before .the is allowed exercise his rights them, over evasions of because the law can ownership more it while certainly by executing the prevented articles not, however, are in its would custody. less an impost the if it were articles, on levied duty on them after landed. were The they policy consequent le- practice before, the or on securing the vying duly entering port; does not that state of nor, limit the power things, consequently, unless prohibition, of the clause so meaning the.true “ What,, confines it. then, ?” are The imports lexicons in- “ us, form are If we they things imported.” appeal usage for the of the word, meaning we shall receive an- themselves, swer. are the articles They which are brought “ then,- A country into on duty is imports,” not merely SUFREME COURT IN THE CASES but is a thing on act duty importation, a duty not, sense, in its confined It is taken literal imported. but ex- levied while the article entering-the country, The after levied it has entered country. tends a-duty- limit words of vthich the'sentence prohibi- succeeding limi- tion, show the extent in which it was understood. “ for ex- what is, necessary bemay except absolutely tation Now, laws, so laws.” inspection ecuting inspection for are exportation, generally far as act they upon articles land, ves- board the before article on on put executed act ; generally sel far importations, they The tax or duty are landed. articles which executed upon if not then, always is a tax which frequently, of inspection, land, is in while the article -on for service performed paid this tax is Yet exception bosom of the country. duties on or ex- lay imports on the States the prohibition was made because the tax would exception ports. within the been have prohibition. otherwise assent, to which all rule be a interpretation If words, from thing general particular proves exception lawgiver, thing that, opinion excepted * clause had the r within general exception shook, this no reason rule we know made, why been to the toas other instru-. constitution be as applicable then this If it be favour applicable, exception ments. laws, far in supporrof inspection goes proving duties classed taxes of a similar framers constitution for the those imposed purposes inspection, character them duties exports, supposed with- and. be prohibited. narrow view the subject, passing we quit

If pf words, look of-1 interpretation literal objects we find no reason for withdrawing the act the prohibition, from its operation. consideration under between different vast States inequality From as to commercial few subjects confederacy, advantages, interest, or . more irritation, excitéd deeper viewed were exercised,, which the several manner in than exercise, duties the power laying seemed disposed deemed From motives were sufficient -imports. OP THE STATES. UNITED in- taxation, statesmen general power day, 182?. was, and as Stateswere it as jealous disp'ensablynecessary as to was so far it, encroachment on abridged any forbad with the them touch single exception imports exports, to. been restrained from im- which noticed. are they Why .has' because, these duties Plainly, general opi- posing nion, the of all interest would be best promoted placing under the control Whether whole subject Congress. “ ex- or duties lay prohibition imposts, from an that the apprehension ports,” proceeded power as to be so exercised disturb that among might equality or that was.generally advantageous, harmony which was desirable between them or to main- which preserve, it. tain our commercial connexions with unimpaired nations, or source of on the to confer revenue govern- Union, ment whatever other motive have in- might it duced the would be prohibition, plain, object defeated a to tax article in the completely by power landed, hands of the the instant it a by power it to tax while There is no difference, entering port. effect, between the sale of an article, a-power prohibit anda its introduction into the power prohibit country. would be a one necessary consequence of the other. would be if none No could be imported sold. No can be object description a accomplished by laying which not be importation, may duty accomplished certainty on the equal by laying thing imported obvious, It is hands of importer. the same can light imposes duty, impose power very heavy one, one which amounts to Questions prohibition; do not degree it depend be ex- may all, ercised. If be at exercised may must exercised at will of those in whose hands it is If the tax placed. in this levied form State, levied will extentWhich defeat the revenue as it by impost, far is drawn from into the importations particular State. W.e told, such wild and irrational abuse of is not to be apprehended, to be into view when taken r,'.alabe its discussing existence. All abused; and the fear its abuse amargument constitute against CASES THE IN SUPREME COURT of'that, existence, it be the existence might urged against 1827. which is and which is universally acknowledged, indispensa- Blown ble to The States will never be so mad safety. v. commerce,'or as to their own it. destroy even to lessen State of Maryland. We do not dissent.from these We general propositions. do not would act we so JBut suppose unwisely. do not on that place ground. question the same force

These with precisely arguments apply with the same rea- It-might, against whole prohibition. he said, that State would so blind its own inte- son be which as to duties on would either rests lay importation Yet our diminish its trade. the framers of con- prohibit have this a which no State ought stitution thought which is the full extent exercise. required, Conceding, on this would, that in its legislation subject, every pro- interests, conceded, cannot be own it for its videjudiciousiy A that each the interests others. respect which the consu- is tax article is imports paid on. a tax States would thus mer. great levy importing States, on the noni would not less a tax which be importing their afford security against because- interest would ample their as'to commerce expel being heavy its-ever .so mea- This would necessarily .produce countervailing ports. was less fa- of those whose on the part situation sures this, For reasons, importation. among vourable duties was, laying whole power taken from the States. When and slight exception, single act is whether within particular pro- are inquiring we not, whether hibition, the.State may legis- but whether the act is itself, Hurt within the words toas late clause. It has been already mischief prohibitory the hands article shown, that tax on the importer, think too dear words; its and we for controver- within is within same tax mischief. We think that sy, has such tax ten- the same precisely unquestionable, of article, to enhance price imposed dency port. bile-entering .the y (cid:127)upon (cid:127) insist, for the State Maryland great counsel in their if the words be taken reason, prohibition abridge will taxation- latitude utmost they OF THE STATES. UNITED all States, which admit to essential extent will never been deprive yet suspected, them revenue, resources which supply necessary have heretofore admitted to These they been possess. must, words therefore, be construed with some limitation; and, admitted, if this insist, coun- entering try of time when the point ceases, and prohibition of the State commences. conceded, words prohibition not to be ought extent; their utmost pressed our complex system, object conferred powers government of Union, the nature of the often con- flicting powers which remain must he always view, taken into aid in words expounding any particular But, clause. while we admit that sound of construction principles ought restrain Courts all from the of the words carrying prohibition the beyond the object constitution is intended secure: must that there be a point ceases, when the time and prohibition the the State to ; cannot tax commences we admit that this point time is the is, instant that the articles It enter country.

we think, obvious, construction defeat the prohibition.

The on the States to constitutional prohibition lay duty on which vast imports, prohibition majority them feel an interest in must preserving, certainly come in with their to tax conflict and acknowledged persons their The power, within and re- territory. property on when it, striction do they though quite distinguishable other, each like the co- yet, intervening approach black, as lours white and approach nearly between as colours in vision understanding, perplex>the perplex the distinction Yet the distinction between them. marking exists, the cases Till they and must as arise. marked arise, being do it to state rule might premature for the is in sufficient present universal its application. has so acted upon that when the generally, say, it become- has thing imported, incorporated has*, it

mixed in the country, up mass property XII. -56 Von. IN CASES THE COURT SUPREME character as an add lost perhaps, import, distinctive 7827- while State; but become subject taxing power warehouse, in his of the property remaining importer, form or- in which was imported, package the original it is escape too duty plainly in the constitution.

prohibition contend, in error for the plaintiffs The counsel United of the duty by payment importer purchases.' as to merchandise, well his States, a dispose right is sup- into the bring country; certainly argument of na- reason, as well as strong ported by practice tions, our of- own. including importation object sale; ; constitutes the duties motive for paying of conferring right possess United every as the sell, paid, consideration be under- should principle dealing requires f3.ii’ commercial stood confer it. most practice to that Duties, to this nations conforms idea. according in--, are are those articles only practice,. charged Thus, sea tended for sale or in the country. consumption vessel, stores, goods imported re-exported for the purpose landed carried over goods land forced some being re-exported port, weather, sale, landed, stress of not for exempt- but The whole course of ed from duties. le- payment shows, that, gislation opinion with the sell connected legislature, payment of duties. counsel for the in error have endeavoured

-The defendant to their that the constitutional prohi- illustrate proposition, bition the country, by ceases the instant enter the goods follow array must which they suppose consequences the denial of it. to If the sell acquires right by importer of duties, payment he exert they say, may, right when, where, and as he and the State cannot pleases, regu-. late it. He sell or as an retail, at may by auction, itinerant pedlar. He may articles, introduce as which gunpowder, endanger into' ; city, the midst of he may population introduce articles which health, and endanger public -the power of may. An self-preservation denied. importer

OF THE UNITED STATES. use, for his own and thus j retain plate, bring goods, 327, valuable from taxation. exempt much property ?rown founded, to if well These objections principle, to But, be entitled serious certainly consideration. we. examination, think, found, be will to ne- belong and, to the not to cessarily principle, prove, consequently, pot it be resorted to with as a criterion may safety by which measure the extent of the prohibition.

This indictment is for against the selling importer, pack- age in the form dry goods in which was it imported, with- out a license. This state he things sells . changed them, or otherwise mixes them with the general property the State, his by up breaking packages, travelling In the case, with them as an first itinerant pedlar. the tax in its way as am intercepts import, import, in- become with the mass it corporated denies property, until shall have privilege becoming incorporated contributed revenue of the State. denies right using privilege he importer pur- from the United chased he shall until also have pur- cases, from the State. chased In the last the tax finds mass article with the already incorporated by property He has used act of the importer. had he privilege and has himself mixed them with the common up purchased, mass, and the law treat as it may them them. The finds same observations or other furniture used apply plate, the importer. Auctioneers, So, if he sells auction. asre persons, State, and if licensed chooses employ them, service, can as he little for this object paying which he an officer of State. apply other for. well, of sale annexed to very importation, it, also, without annexing the offi- privilege using cers licensed to'make sales in a way. peculiar to direct the removal of is a gunpowder branch remains, police unquestionably power, ought remain, with the stores States. If the possessor it himself of town, out im- cannot ón removal because contributes If revenue. ports, nothing it in a placing it is stores prefers because he magazine, public COURT THE SUPREME CASES IN - than else-1 more advantageously in his own there, opinion, j be not that classed áre sure may among We not where. Rmwn of infectious or destruction laws. The removal inspection exercise of that is, undoubtedly, articles or unsound State to the forms an express exception prohibition power, Indeed, of the United the laws States are Considering.

we a State. health laws of sanction the expressly con- in error then,' for which the plaintiffs The principle, tend, a not right, only bring, importer acquires the into but mix them with com- the the articles country, the interfere with the necessa- mon mass property, does is which reside acknowledged taxation ry extent which States, to that for the counsel dangerous in error seem It carries thé apprehend. defendants pro- than to in the constitution farther prevent hibition which it doing great object to prevent. constitution that a article itself

But if should be proved, constitution, it is still argued, repugnant article, but on not a tax this is person. occupations, tax said, this is State, nothing jThe more. ourselves,

It conceal from is va- that this is.impossible form, without It is varying substance. treat-- rying as if it a were general, confined .to prohibition i'óg forbidden mode All dojng must particular thing. sale article, tax on the of an perceive, imported sale, is a tax on the is true, itself. It article tax tax but this must be occupations generally, paid who individual, those or is busi- on his employ ness. The must mechanic, physician, lawyer, either deals, he charge more on the article his itself taxed This State has thing through person. do, because no constitutional right extends prohibition So, a tax on the is, it. ah occupation like add manner, a tax on must the price importation. article, consumer, impor- paid himself, in ter like manner the article direct duty do, itself would made. not a This it is because constitution. prohibited OF THE UNITED STATES. In (cid:127) the support argument, ceases prohibition 1827. the the into a the goods brought instant country, compa- .'Drown

. the rison has been drawn between words opposite export said, to As," means export, to import. carry Maryland; so, out to to country; means import, only bring n But, them it. extend into we to suppose comparison the two States are The forbidden to prohibitions. lay forbidden, on United States are duty exports, to lay a tax or on articles from duty State There exported any is some none is but diversity language, perceivable act which United have the same prohibited. to which the States. right possessed by occupations Now, ex- United States-should require every suppose license, to take out a for which should he shch porter pay think ; tax as to would Congress might go- proper impose to from shield itself censure vernment permitted just to evade which this the prohibitions attempt to. con- it, that this was a tax stitution would by saying, expose article, and legislature not on the had a the person, ? Or, revenue cutters were to-tax occupations suppose off coast for to be stationed purpose levying found in vessels which were on all merchandise leaving ; States for countries it be United received , as an for this were the excuse outrage, government sayr meant more than out exportation carrying goods and as the tax on prohibition country, lay imports, ceased the instant imported, things they brought were so into tax articles the country, prohibition exported were carried when out ceased country We’think, then, that the act under which plaintiffs indicted, is that article the con- error were repugnant “ declares, that no State shall stitution lay any impost or duties exports.” Is it also repugnant constitution Question clause 2. toas “ Congress empowers regulate commerce fo- Jeauiating* nations, several

reign among commerce-. Indian tribes?” state of commerce degraded previous oppressed

n tothe the constitution can forgotten. adoption scarcely It was regulated by view to nations .with single COURT CASES IN THE.SUPREME interests.; own and our efforts counteract their disunited combi- rendered want of restrictions their were impotent indeed, of making nation. Congress, possessed en- treaties; but federal inability government had them force become render appárent

in a useless. Those who felt the degree arising great injury this state of of es- and those who were things, capable of na- the influence of commerce timating prosperity over this control tions, perceived necessity giving doubt- single government. may important from the feebleness ed whether of the evils proceeding of the federal more to that' contributed government, great than which introduced the revolution system, present be conviction, to and commerce ought deep of sur- not, therefore,' It is matter by Congress. regulated mischief, as be as extensive should grant prise, commerce, all c >m- all and and should comprehend to To construe the so as States. among power merce to an in at- its tend defeat efficacy, object, impair took, tainment American justly public a full took, that which arose from conviction interest strong of its necessity. then, is extent to com-

What, of a just power regulate nations, several States? among merce case of Gibbonsv. This was considered it was to declared be Wheat. (9 1.) Ogden, Rep. itself, limitations other and to acknowledge complete is co constitution. power (cid:127)than prescribed by acts, and cannot which it with the extensive State, but must at of a enter boundary the external stopped its interior. now to of these support

Wé deem unnecessary reason is facts truth proved, Their continually propositions. was, think, demonstrated, we our before eyes, mentioned, demonstration, in case already could require Stale, interior If this reaches the bemay power of. the sale exercised, authorizing it must capable there is Commerce introduces. inter those articles which is traffic. Ir- : its most ingredients course one ordinary traffic, authorize this inconceivable, to is power OF UNITED THE STATES. 44? terms, when in the most with the in- given comprehensive tent at cease should be should efficacy complete, when its is its value. continuance point indispeusable-to n To what should the allow purpose importation given, to authorize a sale of unaccompanied ? Sale is thing imported importation, object intercourse, is an essential of that of which ingredient impor- tation a. constitutes as essential an part. ingredient, as then, indispensable the entire as existence thing, itself. importation It must be considered as a component part has a commerce. regulate Congress right, not authorize but to authorize the importation, sell.

If admitted, denied, this be and we think it cannot be what can of an act of which authorizes meaning Congress and offersthe for sale at a fixed importation, price privilege ? who chooses to become a How every person purchaser is it to be to deal construed, if an intent honestly fairly, moral, intent wise enter into the construc- tion ? the contract, What can be the use of what does the if he does importer purchase, purchase privilege sell

What of a would be the language foreign government, merchants, which should be informed that its after import- law, were forbidden sell the' according ing merchandise ? What answer would the United States imported to give and to which such an complaints just reproaches extra- would ? ordinary circumstance them expose Ni apology could be received, even offered. Such a state of things commerce, would break will it not meet this up argument, to that this state of will never say, be things that produced; sense of is a sufficient States good security against The constitution has not confided this to that good sense. It is placed is, elsewhere. where does power not, reside will how far it be abused" probably is, claimed power in its nature, the State in conflict that and the given Congress; in extent greater less (he which it bemay exercised does not enter into inquiry concerning its existence. COURT CASES IN SUPREME THE a sale ex- then, think, We if the to authorize that power 1827'. connect- is ists in the conclusion that the sell Congress, rigfit

Brown e(j wjth the law inseparable permitting importation, incident, inevitable. correct, be the result Jf the we have stated principles conduct us cannot be Any penalty which they mistaken- the article in on the for inflicted selling his charac- to the act Congress be in ter of must importer, opposition intro- authorizes Any charge importation. into and with articles duction incorporation be hostile to must mass power property country, commerce, an essential since to Congress regulate given it,of is to that regulation, principal object pre- part.of for scribe means regular introduction accomplishing and incorporaron. on the

The distinction thing imported, between this have no can influence person importer, It loo obvious controversy, subject. part with'the interfere commerce. equally regulate power contended, been that this construction of the It has power commerce, as was construing contended regulate duties on the ac- abridge Jay imports, prohibition-to citizens, its owrn State to tax their power knowledged within territory. property, but sacred; this cannot

We admit admit power used so as the free to obstruct course that may admit, We cannot that may Congress. given to obstruct or regulate used defeat observed, remain- It has beeri commerce. powers in con- be so as to come exercised ing with When this flict those vested Congress. happens, to that which is must su- that which supreme yield truth is This universal from inseparable great preme, and the the nature constitution applied things, the often powers go- interfering vernments, as a vital operation.' principle perpetual results, necessarily, principle, taxing limits. It cannot reach the States must some have restrain action of the national within government It proper cannot sphere, reach the administration of

OF THE UNITED STATES 449 ol the Union, m the Courts or the collection justice the. 182?. taxes of the United or restrain the-operation'of It cannot law which may Congress constitutionally pftss. with interfere If the States commerce. any regulation State of tax all found on their persons territory, property what shall from in restrain them their transit taxing goods another, the State from one for the through purpose port The laws of trade this authorize re-exportation'? ope- ration, and convenience it. Or what requires should restrain a State from article taxing any passing another, from one through State to for the of traf purpose ?fic or from of articles taxing transportation passing from State, the State itself to another for commercial pur-: ? These all cases are within the poses sovereign power taxation, but obviously measures of Con derange commerce, and affect regulate gress materially pur for which that Wo deem it given. pose unne ppwer farther, this or to cessary press argument give additional of it, illustrations because the was taken up, M'Culloch, with in attention, great v. The State .considered (4 Wheat. the decision in Maryland, 316.) Rep. think, casé is, we to this. entirely applicable add, that we proper suppose principles case, laid in down this apply equally importations a sister State. We do not mean to give any on a opinion between and domestic articles. discriminating is error in

We there of the Court judgment think Appeals affirming judgment Court, of the Baltimore because the act of the City legis- lature which the Maryland, imposing penalty said rendered, is to the constitution judgment repugnant States, and, void. United consequently, judgment'is reversed, the cause remanded to Court, instructions to judgment enter favour the appellants. Thompson Mr. is- Justice It' some re- dissented.

luctance, and diffidence, considerable have very brought dissent from the myself publicly opinion Court' case: and did not con- involve.an important ' n Vor,. XU. COURT THE SUPREME IN CASES of stitutional relative powers relating question 1827. I should silently acquiesce governments,

Brown jn own opinion of the Court, although my judgment not accord with theirs. might error a of The case before this Court on writ comes a Court of the State Appeals of. the defendants. rendered in Court that judgment against indict- were upon below in the Court proceedings of Bal- in city defendants, ment merchants against Sons, & Brown Alexander timore, under the firm of trading to have alleged the penalty and to them against recover an act legislature for a violation incurred, been without State, a foreign dry package selling by said act: by required a license having purpose, is, made argued been only question constitu- violation is in whether the act referred States. of the United tion the 23d February', in The act passed question “ du- act A

1822, and is supplement entitled laying and for other to retailers of ties licenses goods, pur- dry section, under which the the second penalty By poses.” “ enacted, it is that all recovered, has been importers wares, or mer- commodities, or articles foreign dry goods, wine, rum, chandise, brandy', bale or or of package, and other and other distilled &c. spiritous liquors, whiskey, wholesale, bale, or the same package, selling persons tierce, barrel, shall, before are authorized hogshead, directed, sell, a license as act is original take out and, in case of ne- dollars; shall fifty for which they pay license, to take'out such shall be refusal glect as are and forfeitures prescribed pénalties a act which this is supplement.” original 1819, in retail dealers act, in the original passed By to take out license; are required merchandise sup- that wholesale dealers like- act should requires, plemental to sell.' These acts ma- license being take out a pari wise effect to be taken their teria, together, operation are than to retail and whole- more require manifestly nothing be- merchandise, to take out license sale dealers authorized to such fore he sell merchandise. they should STATES. OF THE UNITED or demand any The act license to does not import, require than is more of the required thing is for selling, dealer in article The license imported. : all and is to all importers, general, persons applying bale, Maryland.- wholesale, and other package, selling by persons sell, take out &c. shall, authorized before they license, &c. far as laws, so admitted,

I it to be these understand consti- violation dealers, are not in they relate retail so, and, tution resolves the United States: itself into whether distinction this respect inquiry, dealer merchan- between retail and wholesale in foreign dise, sound of consti- can exist under construction any tution. in drawn of the constitution which have been parts bar, with which the the discussion at the and

question are, law in is to be in that which conflict, supposed commerce with fo- gives regulate to*Congress that nations, States, and and the several reign among shall, of that consent Con- declares without the or duties on ex- gress, lay any imposts, exports, what be- in- for cept necessary executing absolutely laws. spection can,

It law what- obvious, is that this in no manner very ever, commercial intercourse between the States: affect the the internal trade the State Mary- purely applies merchants, in the land. The defendants were trading city such, and describes them The indictment Baltimore. in the sale to have been that and nothing ap- alleges place; inference, goods to warrant package pears ; for at and not intended that place was consumption sold for trans- relation whatever intended has no goods the law notice, State. here to another proper portation did that defendants indictment although alleges, n import the in- sell, framing in the District yet Attorney, to consist in the offence dictment, considered very properly license. not without importation selling, alleged, indictment only that if the had one will No pretend, of foreign did dry the defendants import package license, sustained-. have been could without CASES IN COURT SUPREME TH£ act to the applies importer, selling other persons wholesale; im did that the defendants allegation ®r°wn port, the double character merely descriptive vP"ére in they, and sellers. The dealing, both importers would, been had it djctment have merely undoubtedly, good, that the defendants without a

alleged the package .sold So that license. neither act, nor the form in which the complaint makes presented, discrimination between any wholesale mer any dealer otjjer chandise, hut sell; both to take out a license requires in-, manner, nor does it this me, law, appear any or conflicts with fringes regulate Congress mind, It is commerce-with nations. to be borne in was a before' Slates power possessed by respectively constitution,and ofthe is nota out adoption growing It is establishment general government. viewed, therefore, as the surrender aof power antecedently States, and the extent the surrender must possessed by a fair and reasonable receive reference interpretation was which the surrender This made. object revenue, with a view to the principally, extended only external and did commerce the United embrace the interna! trade commerce of portion the several States. This is not and obvious plain constitution, interpretation terms used in the com nations; merce but such been the construc foreign tion this Court. In case of Gibbonsv. adopted Ogd en, Court, Wheat. 194.) (9 speaking Rep. of the grant to commerce, power Congress regulate say, “ It is not intended to which commerce comprehend is internal, between man completely is carried State, of the man between parts State, different and'which to, States; does hot affect other such extend inconvenient, would be power is and certainly unnecessary.

The enumeration of the classes commerce to particular which the extended, was to be would not have been had made intention been extend the every description.. enumeration not something presupposes enumerated, and that if we something, language regard of-the. be the sentence-must internal exclusively

OF THE UNITED STATES. of a State. The and character genius commerce of the jg27. be, seems that its whole government ap- action ®rown nation, concerns and to to all external those plied afreet the States but internal concerns which not generally, particular State, within to those are completely States, and with which it is which do not affect other not ne? to interfere for' the some of executing cessary purpose general completely powers government. State, internal commerce as then, considered “ And, for the Slate itself.” ac- reserved again, (208.) of a State its its do- knowledged power regulate police, trade, mestic and to own citizens, govern enable on this legislate subject (commerce) to a considerable extent.”

If such the division of between the commerce, in relation where the line governments be drawn commerce between internal external appears me, rule can be that no sound practical other as than to commerce consider the external adopted, ending with the article; importation importa- tion is into the as soon are complete, introduced laws, revenue country, according provisions with the intention of sold here for os being consumption, for the trade, and internal and domestic the du- purpose ties or secured. And paid in which this light ques- tion has been considered this-and Courts of United (5 Cranch, Cranch, 1 Mason, 104. This, it will be 499.) does embrace perceived, merchandise intended for and not for consump- exportation, nor tion; articles intended for commerce between the States; but such for domestic trade intended within the State: and law it is to such articles Ma¿- ryland cannot, think, extends. I that this at therefore, law all interferes to regulate com- power Congress merce; .it, does nor understanding according my constitution, violate with declares that that provision, State shall, without the of Congress, any imposts consent lay (cid:127) or duties on be abso- what may except exports, laws', inspection lutely necessary executing CASES IN THE SUPREME COURT afor The this law to compensation required by paid he. sell, with- cannot be license considered an or duty, impost terms, con- in the sense of these as used meaning to any stitution. refer to not They foreign duty, States. out of the of the internal charge may grow police the,

It fall on and enhance may indirectly imported articl.es. sale; but imposed even this is not an price expense seller, ultimately is borne or other but the consumer.

But argument broad has been assumed principle of the right that the. of the is a payment purchase duty into the the goods of introducing privilege, but of them burden free increased country, selling any and, sus- ; the States be unless this can imposed principle constitu- tained, thelaw is not in violation tion. counsel,

The however, thus aware principle laid down, extent, its full broadly carried out to practically would lead to untenable, that consequences obviously it would at once show it- the unsoundness of the principle self, have limited its wholesale dis- the first application to. distinction, Cán how- position merchandise. such a ever, ? sustained There is in the letter certainly nothing of the constitution to fall within it; nor does it support intendment, reasonable out of the nature of sub- growing matter ject The the States provision. prohibition is is the against laying any impost duty imports, merchandise from the imposition. exempted constitútion no where extraordinary protection gives any im- So confined to the that, if law was importer. he from the could porter-only, find no exemption operation State, laws. Nor there, according my.,judgment, rational which the any. grounds, constitution such considered extending wholesale, exemption If the not to retail dealers. o'f payment sell, to introduce purchase well as privilege - article into difference where can- be the country, whether this one is exercised privilege way retail own merchant often his goods; to sell. should he out license why take compelled 45S THE STATES.

OF UNITED wholesale, is and sells his who when neighbour, imports 1827. fruitless, and But distinction .altogether exempted. .Brown . ’ intended, have been does not effect the object supposed burdens. imposing viz. to take from the States the power Maryland- or en- merchandise, lessen tend to that might upon foreign diminish,the re- and thereby tirely importation, prevent no such It is States. evident venue of the United very can be protection accomplished,' by limiting purpose sale, and the the first admitted, It was that after the first sale. oímass mixed and in the

article becomes incorporated use, to domestic and to property country, applied knows, that one But it loses this every pretended privilege. sale, af- retail or burden

whatever charge imposed upon as much as if laid directly fects the wholesale indirectly, into cal- takes charge retail dealer wholesale. The merchant, and culation in the from the wholesale purchase course, which, Suppose affects importation. equally dealer, the wholesale dollars to be fifty required paid ‘ merchant, it not would was on the retail equally imposed would increase It the bur- importation equally affect den, enhance the of the article when it comes expense consumer, hands of the into the and on whom all the charges fall. if these are so increased by ultimately charges And the State trade, of the internal governments, any stages as to check their sale for it will af- necessarily consumption, short of a total So nothing fect the ex- importation. taxes, under all circumstan- from State charges

emption ces, constitution. will answer supposed object the. to such would be a restric- lengths,

And principle push not warranted constitu- authority, tion upon tion. maintained, that the cannot be States have no certainly to tax merchandise'. But

authority imported prin- of discrimination between the wholesale retail ciple dealer, sell, ifme, to a license seem well-found- ed, to And woul‘d extend taxes of every description. mer- a wholesale présent singular exempt incongruity, chant from all his stock taxes upon goods, taxation stock the like neighbour selling by his who retail supreme cases in the

45G court It is laid down in 32 of No. 1 believi- Federalist, (and “ that universally ex- sole admitted,) of duties on ception retain exports, authority sense; tax the most at- absolute unqualified 'aryland. tempt abridge the national part government them in it, exercise of would abe violent assumption unwarranted consti- power, any article clause tution.” considered Although impost tax be un- sense, most yet every enlarged cannot derstood to of or the sense the con- mean impost fluty stitution. As here it used, refers to evidently foreign would by revenue laws. It be duty imposed singular use the term estate; a lax on real and impost, apply one, I no would articles .contend, that all presume, imported which the all duties have been upon exempt paid, State taxation in the And this hands the consumer. yet follow, if lax are, and iii all duly synony- respects, ; for the shall declares, mous constitution that no State lay viz. the To avoid article any duty imports, imported. inadmissible,. these which are consequences, certainly inhibition as States be understood miist extending duties, and not to taxes foreign imposed trade, after the internal become articles for and use domestic and then become consumption; to State jurisdiction. to have law seems been as- This treated imposed or the It upon cer- duty importer, importation. noof such admits construction. It is a tainly charge upon dealer, wholesale whoever he may be, and to operate and not sale, the importation. upon requires upon and stand sell, must the purchase privilege as a of a to sell footing purchase privilege any retail, manner, auction, as or as at hawkers pedlars, State way or in whatever .may Whether policy require. are wise such not a politic, for regulations this Court. If broad contended principle part m error, duty plaintiffs payment founded, well purchase privilege selling, is. limit can be the States set the exercise privi- State sale all lege. first made in defiance OF THE STATES. UNITED and all State sales regulation; laws regulating 1827.’ a, are un- auction, at WV imposing thereupon, ®r®wn constitutional, far, events, so all as at the sale may tierce, bale, And, indeed, barrel &c. hogshead, package, Maryland*, as an to sell follows incident if the importation, oyer all control take infectious it will and noxious away unsold, whilst in the hands of the The, goods, importer. out to its full extent, when carried would inevita- principle, to such lead consequences. bly.

It has been urged great earnestness the Court, upon that if States are permitted such lay taxés charges sobe imports, they may and increased upon multiplied all If this entirely stop importations. argument presents to the law in the answer serious objection question,, it, in been myjudgment, already the limita- given: for, of State tion, as contended will hot effect power, the ob- additional Whether this burden jects proposed. i&imposed dealer, wholesale retail will affect the equally short of a total nothing exemption from importation; will taxation every description, all take from charges way in some legislating affect importation. indirectly drawn the existence of against

But arguments its abuse are and from supposed illogical, lead to generally And this unsound conclusions. emphatically, when ap- of It to our system government. the supposes interest plied under State general of the governments, peo.ples to other, with each instead of in hostility considering the as of the parts system, two governments form- for the same but one government people, ing its having common interest and the same welfare of all. object aof abuse If the supposed satisfactory objec- existence, will to tion its equally apply of many of it is government; .the as powers reasonable would wish to people suppose injure destroy themselves, through instrumentalityNf one govern-, other. ment

The doctrine the Court in the case of M'Culloch v. 316.) State Wheat. (4 Rep. been urged XII 5S Von. supreme court. cases in

(cid:127)45B to the unfavourable bearing question having upon case that that me, of the law. But it validity appears admitted, that the It is there warrants such conclusion. incident of and is co-ex- is an sovereignty, of taxation is an And to which it incident. that all sub- with tensive extends, of a State sovereign which the over jects, bank the United States could of taxation. The objects ' States, was an because it instrument by not taxed in the execution of its by government powers, employed into under the existence the Uni- It was called authority not ted could course existed have previously so, however, as an of taxation States. Not by abject ; with were in they existence, and under respect control the absolute of the States, before the jurisdiction constitution; is, therefore, And it adoption as to them, States, and power' surrender this has what extent been to the given np United States. case, it is admitted in And expressly the opinion did not the States resources any deprive originally nor tax the real any paid possessed; of the property other real in common property within the bank, ; to tax interest nor which the citi- imposed institution, cofrimon, zens of hold Maryland may of the same description property throughout the unconstitutional, State. But the was held because laid bank, a tax operations consequently of an instrument employed operation government Union into carry powers execution; and this instrument, created by government of the Union. But do not ih'ese law objections apply question. The found ofthe Union the States in the government full exercise over sovereign power imports. one of the sources revenue originally possessed States. The law does act directly upon purport thing has been general government, surrendered viz. the external It may State. commerce of the operate indirectly it to extent; but cannot made essentially some impede of the the operations government; retard not more so than by be effected stock held might by individuals United States. o'f in the bank And, the indeed, the OF THE UNITED STATES. former, of the crippling operations government, go case, would not be as in the latter; for it has practicable

the whole of the of its range property taxation, citizens for and to the means for on its provide carrying measures. So that it beyond States materially reach.of to affect the operations general government, tax- by ing merchandise, should do. so to they disposed am,

I accordingly, opinion, judgment Court of of the State of to be Appeals Maryland ought affirmed.

Judgment. on, This cause came &c. On consideration Court whereof, is of this there is opinion, error said rendered Court by in this, judgment Appeals of the Court City of Baltimore, that the judgment condemning Brown, Brown, said Alexander John. George A. Brown, mentioned, Brown, to and James therein pay penalty have been so not to rendered ought because against them, n legislature act of the entitled, State of Maryland, cl actAn to the act supplementary duties laying on licenses dry retailers goods, purposes,” on which on which the said indictment judgment rendered is “ enacts, as it that all founded, far importers of foreign wares, or articles, of dry goods, merchandise, bale or by rum, wine, or of brandy, or other distil- whiskey, package, &c. selling the same liquors, led wholesale, spiritous barrel, or tierce, shall, Ijale, hogshead, package, before to sell, take out a license as are authorized the ori- they dollars; for which directed, shall act pay fifty ginal license, or refusal to take out such and, neglect in case und penalties forfeitures as be subject shall to which act this is a original supplement,” prescribed constitution the United is repugnant Court of whom the said before Appeals, void; wherefore of the said Court Baltimore was City said judgment affirmed, but should have ought by appeal, brought it is reversed, same. Wherefore considered have said Court Court, said Ap- judgment Court of Bah City judgment said affirming peals, m COURT CASES IN THE SUPREME be cause annulled, and that timore, be the reversed

1827; with directions -remanded said Court Appeals, U. States same; reVerse the Gooding. Pleading.} Acts. Evidence. (Slave Trade Gooding. United States against oi 20th the Act of Slave Trade the Upon an under indictment testimony ship, 1818, the the owner April, eh. 373. against gestee, the res master, part being the of. declarations the within the voyage, the with connected in lurtherance acts owner, conduct in scope authority, agent his against owner. evidence in guilty enterprise, Admissible owner, with fit- him charging Upon against such an indictment illegal1 voyage, her employ ting ship out the intent authorized, commanded, super- he evidence is admissible instrumentality agents, of his fitment, through intended present. being personally without out, of Con- the acts under fitting It is not essential constitute slave voyage, for a necessary gress, every equipment voyage, to such should taken equipment adapted peculiarly actually board; fitted out with in- if the vessel it is sufficient voyage. tent to illegal employed in indictment, specify particulars necessary such In is- not out; offence words fitting allege it is sufficient of the statute. isNor it necessary should be any principal that there offender to whom the defendant might abetting. These terms aiding ;o statute do of principal not refer relation and acces- sory actor, in cases he wild felony; both aids and abets act, principals. considered as is necessary aver, should indictment vessel built, out, sail, fitted &c.- or caused to sent-away, or be uithin jurisdiction the United States. “ out,

An averment that the ship was fitted &c. intent tito said vessel trade, should be fatally the slave defec- employed” “ tive, words of being, the statute with intent employ”'the trade, vessel ih the slave exclusively referring the inteht of act, party causing the

Case Details

Case Name: Brown v. Maryland

Court Name: Supreme Court of the United States

Date Published: Mar 12, 1827

Citation: 25 U.S. 419

Court Abbreviation: SCOTUS