Page:Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (1st ed, 1833, vol II).djvu/413

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
CH. XIV.]
POWERS OF CONGRESS—TAXES.
405

difficulties arising from this collision between the state and national governments might be easily avoided by a separation and distinction, as to the subjects of taxation, or by other methods, which might be easily devised. Thus, for instance, the general government might be entrusted with the power of external taxation, such as laying duties and imposts on goods imported; and the states remain exclusively in possession of the power of internal taxation. Or power might be given to the general government to lay taxes exclusively upon certain specified subjects; or to lay taxes, if requisitions on the states were not complied with;[1] or, if the specified subjects failed to produce an adequate revenue, resort might be had to requisitions, or even to direct taxes, to supply the deficiency.[2]

§ 933. In regard to these objections it was urged, that it was impossible to rely (as the history of the government under the confederation abundantly proved) upon requisitions upon the states.[3] Direct taxes were exceedingly unequal, and difficult to adjust;[4] and could

    ot's Debates, 52, 53, 208; 3 Elliot's Debates, 77 to 91; 1 Tuck. Black. Comm. App. 240; 2 Amer. Museum, 543, 544.

  1. 3 Amer. Museum, 423; 2 Elliot's Debates, 52, 53, 200, 206.
  2. See The Federalist, No. 30; 1 Elliot's Debates, 294; 1 Tucker's Black. Comm. App. 234, 235; 1 Elliot's Debates, 294, 295; 2 Elliot's Debates, 52, 53, 111, 112; id. 200, 206, 208.—It was moved in the convention, that whenever revenue was required to be raised by direct taxation, it should be apportioned among the states, and then requisitions made upon the states to pay the amount; and in default only of their compliance, congress should be authorized to pass acts directing the mode of collecting it. But this proposition was rejected by a vote of seven states against one, one state being divided.[a 1]
  3. The Federalist, No. 30; 1 Elliot's Debates, 303, 304; id. 325, 326, 327; 2 Elliot's Debates, 198, 199, 204.
  4. The Federalist, No. 21; 1 Elliot's Debates, 81, 82; 2 Elliot's Debates, 105; id. 199, 204, 236; 1 Tucker's Black. Comm. App. 234, 235, 236; 3Dall. R. 171, 178.
  1. Journal of the Convention, p. 274.