Page:Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (1st ed, 1833, vol II).djvu/433

direct tax.

Mr. Justice Patterson, in the same case, said,

It is not necessary to determine, whether a tax on the produce of land be a direct or an indirect tax. Perhaps the immediate product of land, in its original and crude state, ought to be considered, as a part of the land itself. When the produce is converted into a manufacture, it assumes a new shape, &c. Whether "direct taxes," in the sense of the constitution, comprehend any other tax, than a capitation tax, or a tax on land, is a questionable point, &c. I never entertained a doubt, that the principal, I will not say the only, objects, that the framers of the constitution contemplated, as falling within the rule of apportionment, were a capitation tax and a tax on land.

And he proceeded to state, that the rule of apportionment, both as regards representatives, and as regards direct taxes, was adopted to guard the Southern states against undue impositions and oppressions in the taxing of slaves. Mr. Justice Iredell, in the same case, said,

Perhaps a direct tax, in the sense of the constitution, can mean nothing but a tax on something inseparably annexed to the soil; something capable of apportionment under all such circumstances. A land or poll tax may be considered of this description. The latter is to be considered so, particularly under the present constitution, on account of the slaves in the Southern states, who give a ratio in the representation in the proportion of three to five. Either of these is capable of an apportionment. In regard to other articles, there may possibly be considerable doubt.

The reasoning of the Federalist seems to lead to the same result.^[1]
§ 953. In the year 1794, congress passed an act,^[2] laying duties upon carriages for the conveyance of per-

---

1. The Federalist, No. 31, 36.
2. Act of 1794, ch. 45.

vol. ii.54