FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217  
218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   >>   >|  
decision to mark a retreat from the Berwind-White case.[608] The second case, Nippert _v._ Richmond,[609] involved a municipal ordinance imposing upon solicitors of orders for goods a license tax of fifty dollars and one-half of one per cent of the gross earnings, commissions, etc., for the preceding year in excess of $1,000. Speaking for the same majority that had decided McLeod _v._ Dilworth Co., Justice Rutledge found that "as the case has been made, the issue is substantially whether the long line of so-called 'drummer cases' beginning with Robbins _v._ Shelby County Taxing District, 120 U.S. 489, shall be adhered to in result or shall now be overruled in the light of what attorneys for the city say are recent trends requiring that outcome."[610] The tax was held void, Berwind-White being not only "distinguished" this time, but also "explained." "The drummer," said Justice Rutledge, "is a figure representative of a by-gone day," citing Wright, Hawkers and Walkers in Early America (1927). "But his modern prototype persists under more euphonious appellations. So endure the basic reasons which brought about his protection from the kind of local favoritism the facts of this case typify."[611] A year later a Mississippi "privilege tax" laid upon each person soliciting business for a laundry not licensed in the State, was set aside directly on the authority of the Robbins case.[612] It would appear that Robbins and his numerous progeny can once more claim full constitutional status.[613] TAXATION OF CARRIAGE OF PERSONS Whether the carriage of persons from one State to another was a branch of interstate commerce was a question which the Court was able to side-step in Gibbons _v._ Ogden.[614] A quarter of a century later, however, an affirmative answer was suggested in the Passenger Cases,[615] in which a State tax on each passenger arriving on a vessel from a foreign country was set aside, though chiefly in reliance on existing treaties and acts of Congress. But similar cases arising after the Civil War were disposed of by direct recourse to the commerce clause.[616] Meantime, in 1865, the newly admitted State of Nevada, in an endeavor to prevent a threatened dissipation of its population, levied a special tax on railroad and stage companies for every passenger they carried out of the State, and in Crandall _v._ Nevada[617] this act was held void on the general ground that the National Government had at all time
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217  
218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Robbins

 

passenger

 
Nevada
 

drummer

 

Berwind

 

commerce

 

Justice

 

Rutledge

 

carriage

 

persons


interstate

 

Gibbons

 

Whether

 

branch

 

question

 

progeny

 
directly
 

licensed

 

authority

 

laundry


business

 

privilege

 

Mississippi

 

person

 
soliciting
 

status

 

constitutional

 
TAXATION
 

CARRIAGE

 
numerous

PERSONS
 
foreign
 

dissipation

 

population

 

levied

 

railroad

 

special

 
threatened
 
prevent
 

Meantime


admitted

 
endeavor
 
companies
 

ground

 

general

 

National

 
Government
 

carried

 

Crandall

 

clause