*1 70
tained abandoning principles long without established a of and host precedents soundly based. McReynolds Mr. Justice Roberts opinú
join in this McGOLDRICK, COMPTROLLER OF CITY OF THE YORK,
NEW FELT & TARRANT MFG. CO.* v. Argued January 2, 29, January No. 45. 1940. Decided Chanler, Mr. William with C. whom Messrs. Sol Charles Levine, B. Hennefeld, Edmund and Jerome R. Heller- on briefs, stein were petitioner. * Together 474, McGoldrick, Comptroller with No. City of York, DuGrenier, Inc., al., H. on
New v. et also certiorari, A. writ of 545, Supreme New Court of York. U. S. *3 Mr. Newton K. Fox for respondent in No. 45. *5 Jackson, Haig John H. with whom Mr. H. Mr. David respondents ian was on the No. 474. brief, ' delivered Stone Court. *6 McGoldrick v. Berwind- companion
These are cases to the ante, in Mining Co., p. Coal 33. As that case White is New York tax City for decision whether the question as upon goods laid of to consumption applied sales respondents infringes the commerce clause the of Federal Constitution.
Upon
by
to
Comp
certiorari
review determinations
the
of the
of New
City
York,
respond
troller
that each
the
of
subject
tax,
was
of
Appellate
ents
to
the
Division
the
Supreme
New
the levy
the
York
Court set
aside. Matter
&
Taylor,
Felt
Tarrant
254
Mfg.
App.
246;
Co. v.
Div.
of
DuGrenier,
4
615;
Inc.,
N.Y. S. 2d
A. H.
255
Matter of
App.
961;
Div.
8 N. Y. S.
2d
The New York Court
of Appeals,
opinion,
without
in
judgment
the
affirmed
each
279
case,
N.Y.
N. E. 2d
678;
311; 281
Y.N.
18
608; 22
E. 2d 172,
by
N.
but
its amended remittitur de
that
clared
the affirmance was
the
upon
ground
sole
that
the tax infringed the
clause
commerce
of the Federal
Constitution,
688;
N. Y.
Respondent, Co., Felt & Tarrant Mfg. an Illinois cor- poration, with factory its and principal place of business state, in that manufactures and sells adding and calculat- known, ing machines comptometers. as It an maintains in City, office New York from which its agents in solicit city the orders for comptometers, which are forwarded to the Illinois approval. office for If accepted each order by is filled allocating to it the purchased comptometer designated by its serial number. It is invoiced purchaser and shipped to the New York City of office respondent’s agent, sales where it is inspected, tested and adjusted, and then delivered to the purchaser. Remit- by tances the purchaser made the direct to Illinois are in The course of business soliciting filling office. and or- material ders far as now is that of the same company, so Mfg. in Felt & Gallagher, described Tarrant Co. v. U. S. 62.
Respondent, a DuGrenier, Inc., corpora- Massachusetts tion with factory its in principal office state, that is in engaged the manufacture and sale of automatic vend- ing They machines. are throughout sold the United States an by exclusive sales agent,, respondent Stewart & McGuire, Inc., having an office in York New City. The city, sales when not machines located at the New York office, are through effected solicitations of by orders the agent, from which the prospective takes *7 purchaser a signed order or a contract for a conditional payment, sale on partial which is by agent forwarded the If accepted Massachusetts office. there the order is by filled the shipping purchased by machine rail or truck in purchaser direct to the New York City, pays who freight. the
In both tax was on imposed cases the all the sales of merchandise for orders were taken city which within the of which possession and was to the purchaser transferred Decision in both is by there. controlled our decision in For Company the Berwind-White case. reasons stated in in the that the length at case tax so laid does commerce clause. The infringe judgments not the will causes remanded for further proceed reversed and the be opinion. with this not inconsistent ings
Reversed. The Chief Justice, McReynolds, judgments Roberts dissent the in from these Mr. Justice grounds stated upon dissenting opinion cases ante, Co., Mining Berwind-White Coal in McGoldrick v. p.