Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

L. ed. 1151, 1153, 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 132; Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co. 220 U. S. 61, 78, 79, 55 L. ed. 369, 377, 378, 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 337, Ann. Cas. 1912C, 160; Flint v. Stone Tracy Co. 220 U. S. 107, 174, 55 L. ed. 389, 422, 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 342, Ann. Cas. 1912B, 1312; Keeney v. New York, 222 U. S. 525, 536, 56 L. ed. 299, 305, 38 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1139, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 105; Second Employers' Liability Cases (Mondou v. New York, N. H. & H. R. Co.) 223 U. S. 1, 53, 56 L. ed. 327, 347, 38 L.R.A. (N.S.) 44, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 169, 1 N. C. C. A. 875; Quong Wing v. Kirkendall, 223 U. S. 59, 62, 56 L. ed. 350, 351, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 192; Rosenthal v. New York, 226 U. S. 260, 270, 57 L. ed. 212, 216, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 27, Ann. Cas. 1914B, 71; Metropolis Theatre Co. v. Chicago, 228 U. S. 61, 69, 70, 57 L. ed. 730, 733, 734, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 441; Barrett v. Indiana, 229 U. S. 26, 29, 30, 57 L. ed. 1050, 1052, 1053, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 692; Billings v. United States, 232 U. S. 261, 283, 58 L. ed. 596, 606, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 421; International Harvester Co. v. Missouri, 234 U. S. 199, 215, 58 L. ed. 1276, 1283, 52 L.R.A. (N.S.) 525, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 859; Mt. St. Mary's Cemetery Asso. v. Mullins, 248 U. S. 501, 506, 63 L. ed. 383, 387, 39 Sup. Ct. Rep. 173; Withnell v. Ruecking Constr. Co. 249 U. S. 63, 71, 63 L. ed. 479, 484, 39 Sup. Ct. Rep. 200; Dominion Hotel Co. v. Arizona, 249 U. S. 265, 63 L. ed. 597, 39 Sup. Ct. Rep. 273; Chalker v. Birmingham & N. W. R. Co. 249 U. S. 522, 527, 63 L. ed. 748, 751, 39 Sup. Ct. Rep. 366; Mackay Teleg. & Cable Co. v. Little Rock, 250 U. S. 94, 100, 63 L. ed. 863, 869, 39 Sup. Ct. Rep. 428; Maxwell v. Bugbee, 250 U. S. 525, 541, 543, 63 L. ed. 1124, 1132, 1133, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 2; Branson v. Bush, 251 U. S. 182, 189, 190, 64 L. ed. 215, 220, 221, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 113; Shaffer v. Carter, 252 U. S. 37, 58, 64 L. ed. 445. 459, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 221; Goldsmith v. George G. Prendergast Constr. Co. 252 U. S. 12, 17, 18, 64 L. ed. 427, 430, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 273; F. S. Royster Guano Co. v. Virginia, 253 U. S. 412, 64 L. ed. 989, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 560; Gast Realty & Invest. Co. V. Schneider Granite Co. 240 U. S. 55, 60 L. ed. 523,

Barbier v. Connolly, 113 U. S. 27, 28 L. ed. 923, 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 357; Soon Hing v. Crowley, 113 U. S. 703, 28 L. ed. 1145, 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 730; Kentucky R. Tax Cases, 115 U. S. 321, 337, 29 L. ed. 414, 419, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 57; Missouri P. R. Co. v. Humes, 115 U. S. 512, 523, 29 L. ed. 463, 466, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 110; Royall v. Virginia, 116 U. S. 572, 580, 29 L. ed. 735, 737, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 510; Hayes v. Missouri, 120 U. S. 68, 30 L. ed. 578, 7 Sup. Ct. Rep. 350; Pacific Exp. Co. v. Seibert, 142 U. S. 339, 351, 354, 35 L. ed. 1035, 1039, 1040, 3 Inters. Com. Rep. 810, 12 Sup. Ct. Rep. 250; Magoun v. Illinois Trust & Sav. Bank, 170 U. S. 283, 293, 294, 300, 42 L. ed. 1037, 1042, 1043, 1045, 18 Sup. Ct. Rep. 594; Cotting v. Kansas City Stock Yards Co. (Cotting v. Godard) 183 U. S. 79, 112, 46 L. ed. 92, 109, 22 Sup. Ct. Rep. 30; Florida C. & P. R. Co. v. Reynolds, 183 U. S. 471, 477, 478, 46 L. ed. 283, 286, 287, 22 Sup. Ct. Rep. 176; Armour Packing Co. v. Lacy, 200 U. S. 226, 236, 50 L. ed. 451, 457, 26 Sup. Ct. Rep. 232; New York ex rel. Hatch v. Reardon, 204 U. S. 152, 159, 160, 51 L. ed. 415, 421, 422, 27 Sup. Ct. Rep. 188, 9 Ann. Cas. 736; Travis v. Yale & T. Mfg. Co. 252 U. S. 60, 77, 78, 64 L. ed. 460, 468, 469, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 228; United States v. Doremus, 249 U. S. 86, 94, 63 L. ed. 493, 496, 39 Sup. Ct. Rep. 214; Ballard v. Hunter, 204 U. S. 241, 262, 51 L. ed. 461, 474, 27 Sup. Ct. Rep. 261; Davidson v. New Orleans, 96 U. S. 97, 107, 108, 24 L. ed. 616, 620, 621; Twining v. New Jersey, 211 U. S. 78, 100, 101, 53 L. ed. 97, 106, 107, 29 Sup. Ct. Rep. 14; Kentucky R. Tax Cases, 115 U. S. 321, 337, 29 L. ed. 414, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 57; Bell's Gap R. Co. v. Pennsylvania, 134 U. S. 232, 237, 33 L. ed. 892, 895, 10 Sup. Ct. Rep. 533; Gulf, C. & S. F. R. Co. v. Ellis, 165 U. S. 150, 155, 41 L. ed. 666, 668, 17 Sup. Ct. Rep. 255; American Sugar Ref. Co. v. Louisiana, 179 U. S. 89, 92, 45 L. ed. 102, 103, 21 Sup. Ct. Rep. 43; McHenry v. Alford, 168 U. S. 651, 666, 42 L. ed. 614, 619, 18 Sup. Ct. Rep. 242; Clark v. Kansas City, 176 U. S. 114, 119, 44 L. ed. 392, 397, 20 Sup. Ct. Rep. 284; Billings v. Illinois, 188 U. S. 97, 101, 102, 47 L. ed. 400, 402, 403, 23 Sup. Ct. Rep. 272; District of Colum-36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 254; Houck v. bia v. Brooke, 214 U. S. 138, 150, 151, 53 L. ed. 941, 945, 946, 29 Sup. Ct. Rep. 560; Southern R. Co. v. Green, 216 U. S. 400, 417, 54 L. ed. 536, 541, 30 Sup. Ct. Rep. 287, 17 Ann. Cas. 1247; Griffith v. Connecticut, 218 U. S. 563, 569, 54

Little River Drainage Dist. 239 U. S. 254, 262, 60 L. ed. 266, 274, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 58; Martin v. District of Columbia, 205 U. S. 135, 139, 51 L. ed. 743, 744, 27 Sup. Ct. Rep. 440; Brushaber v. Union P. R. Co. 240 U. S. 1, 60 L. ed.

493, L.R.A.1917D, 414, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 236, Ann. Cas. 1917B, 713; French v. Teschemaker, 24 Cal. 544; Miller v. Kister, 68 Cal. 142, 8 Pac. 813; Booth v. Woodbury, 32 Conn. 118; Herriott v. Potter, 115 Iowa, 648, 89 N. W. 91; Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. v. Clark, 60 Kan. 826, 47 L.R.A. 77, 58 Pac. 477; Sutton v. Louisville, 5 Dana, 28; Lexington v. McQuillan, 9 Dana, 513, 35 Am. Dec. 159; Cheaney v. Hooser, 9 B. Mon. 330; New Orleans Canal & Bkg. Co. v. New Orleans, 30 La. Ann. 1371; Com. v. People's Five Cents Sav. Bank, 5 Allen, 428; Freeland v. Hastings, 10 Allen, 570; Oliver v. Washington Mills, 11 Allen, 268; Portland Bank v. Apthorp, 12 Mass. 252; Cheshire v. Berkshire County, 118 Mass. 386; Woodbridge v. Detroit, 8 Mich. 274; Ryerson v. Utley, 16 Mich. 269; People ex rel. Detroit & H. R. Co. v. Salem, 20 Mich. 452, 4 Am. Rep. 400; Callam v. Saginaw, 50 Mich. 7, 14 N. W. 677; Sanborn v. Rice County, 9 Minn. 273, Gil. 258; State ex rel. Foot v. Bazille, 97 Minn. 11, 6 L.R.A.(N.S.) 732, 106 N. W. 93, 7 Ann. Cas. 1056; Macon v. Patty, 57 Miss. 378; 34 Am. Rep. 451; Deal v. Mississippi County, 107 Mo. 464, 14 L.R.A. 622, 18 S. W. 24; State v. Loomis, 115 Mo. 307, 21 L.R.A. 789, 22 S. W. 350; State v. Julow, 129 Mo. 163, 29 L.R.A. 257, 50 Am. St. Rep. 443, 31 S. W. 781; Magneau v. Fremont, 30 Neb. 843, 9 L.R.A. 786,

27 Am. St. Rep. 436, 47 N. W. 280; State v. United States & C. Exp. Co. 60 N. H. 219; Thompson v. Kidder, 74 N. H. 89, 65 Atl. 392, 12 Ann. Cas. 948; State ex rel. White House School Dist. v. Readington Twp. 36 N. J. L. 66; State, Agens, Prosecutor, v. Newark, 37 N. J. L. 415, 18 Am. Rep. 729; State ex rel. Richards v. Hammer, 42 Ñ. J. L. 435; Maxwell v. Edwards, 89 N. J. L. 446, 99 Atl. 138; Tide-water Co. v. Coster, 18 N. J. Eq. 518, 90 Am. Dec. 634; People ex rel. Griffin v. Brooklyn, 4 N. Y. 419, 55 Am. Dec. 266; People ex rel. Farrington v. Mensching, 187 N. Y. 8, 10 L.R.A. (N.S.) 625, 79 N. E. 884, 10 Ann. Cas. 101; Stuart v. Palmer, 74 N. Y. 183, 30 Am. Rep. 289; People ex rel. Scott v. Pitt, 169 N. Y. 521, 58 L.R.A. 372, 62 N. E. 662; Re Pell, 171 N. Y. 48, 57 L.R.A. 540, 89 Am. St. Rep. 791, 63 N. E. 789; People ex rel. Hatch v. Reardon, 184 N. Y. 431, 8 L.R.A. (N.S.) 314, 112 Am. St. Rep. 628, 77 N. E. 970, 6 Ann. Cas. 515; People ex rel. Eisman v. Ronner, 185 N. Y. 285, 77 N. E. 1061; Re Keeney, 194 N. Y. 281, 87 N. E. 428, affirmed in 222 U.

S. 525, 56 L. ed. 299, 38 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1139, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 105; Puitt v. Gaston County, 94 N. C. 709, 55 Am. Rep. 638; Scovill v. Cleveland, 1 Ohio St. 126; DeBolt v. Ohio L. Ins. & T. Co. 1 Ohio St. 563; Northern Indiana R. Co. v. Connelly, 10 Ohio St. 159; Ellis v. Frazier, 38 Or. 462, 53 L.R.A. 454, 63 Pac. 642; Bank of Pennsylvania v. Com. 19 Pa. 144; Sharpless v. Philadelphia, 21 Pa. 147, 59 Am. Dec. 759; Philadelphia Asso. v. Wood, 39 Pa. 73; Tyson v. School Directors, 51 Pa. 9; Durach's Appeal, 62 Pa. 491; Hammett v. Philadelphia, 65 Pa. 146; Re Washington Ave. 69 Pa. 352, 8 Am. Rep. 255; Fox's Appeal, 112 Pa. 337, 4 Atl. 149; vania R. Co. 138 Pa. 375, 21 Atl. 763; Allegheny City v. Western PennsylPittsburgh's Petition, 138 Pa. .401, 21 Atl. 757, 759, 761; Re Morewood Ave. 159 Pa. 20, 28 Atl. 123, 132; Cope's EsSt. Rep. 749, 43 Atl. 79; Re McKennan, tate, 191 Pa. 1, 45 L.R.A. 316, 71 Am. 25 S. D. 369, 33 L.R.A. (N.S.) 606, 126 N. W. 611; Stratton Claimants v. Morris Claimants (Dibrell v. Lanier) 89 Tenn. 497, 12 L.R.A. 70, 15 S. W. 87; Allen v. Drew, 44 Vt. 174; Richmond & A. R. Co. v. Lynchbury, 81 Va. 473; Beals v. State, 139 Wis. 544, 121 N. W. 347; Black v. State, 113 Wis. 205, 90 Am. St. Rep. 853, 89 N. W. 522; Friend v. Levy, 76 Ohio St. 26, 80 N. E. 1036;

Curry v. Spencer, 61 N. H. 624, 60 Am. Rep. 337; State ex rel. Garth v. Switzler, 143 Mo. 287, 40 L.R.A. 280, 65 Am. rel. Frye v. Bazille, 87 Minn. 500, 94 St. Rep. 653, 45 S. W. 245; State ex Am. St. Rep. 718, 92 N. W. 415; Drew v. Tifft, 79 Minn. 175, 47 L.R.A. 525, 79 Am. St. Rep. 446, 81 N. W. 839; State ex rel. Davidson v. Gorman, 40 Minn. 232, 2 L.R.A. 701, 41 N. W. 948.

The term "direct taxes," as used in the Constitution, embraces every exaction that rests upon the fact of ownership of real or personal property, as distinguished from a tax dependent upon the active use of property, the term "active use" not indicating the merely passive consequence of ownership, but rather the exercise of some right or privilege.

Brushaber v. Union P. R. Co. 240 U. S. 1, 13, 60 L. ed. 493, 499, L.R.A.1917D, 414, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 236, Ann. Cas. 1917B, 713; State Tonnage Tax Cases (Cox v. Lott) 12 Wall. 204, 215, 20 L. ed. 370, 374; State Tax on Foreign-held Bonds, 15 Wall. 300, 319, 21 L. ed. 179, 186; Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & T. Co.

Barbier v. Connolly
L. ed. 923, 5 Sup
Hing v. Crowley,.
1145, 5 Sup. Ct.
Tax Cases, 115 L
414, 419, 6 S
P. R. Co. v. 1
29 L. ed. 46.

Royall v. 29 L. ed. Hayes v. ed. 578.

Co. v. 35 L. Rep. v. I

S.

10

The exaction is a tax upon property reason of its ownership.

Re Swift, 137 N. Y. 85, 18 L.R.A. 709, 52 N. E. 1096; United States v. Perkins, 163 U. S. 625, 629, 41 L. ed. 287, 288, 16 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1073; Re Vanderbilt, 172 V. N. Y. 74, 64 N. E. 782; Re Keeney, 194 cer v. N. Y. 285, 87 N. E. 428, affirmed in 222 20. 64 | U. S. 525, 56 L. ed. 299, 38 L.R.A.(N.S.)

Sap. 1139, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 105; Flint v. C. S. Stone Tracy Co. 20 U. S. 107, 163, 164, 3.744, 1955 L. ed. 389, 418, 419, 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. Tracy 342, Ann. Cas. 1912B, 1312; Hanson, 31 Sup. Death Duties, 4th ed. p. 63; Atty. Gen. 13, 1312; v. Beech, [1899] A. C. 53, 68 L. J. Q. U. S. 290, B. N. S. 130, 63 J. P. 116, 47 Week. Rep. C. Rep. 427; 257, 79 L. T. N. S. 565, 15 Times L. R. Sr. S. 41, 59, 85; Winans v. Atty. Gen. [1910] A. C. S. Ct. Rep. 747. 27, 79 L. J. K. B. N. S. 156, 101 L. T. N. the essential char- S. 754, 26 Times L. R. 133, 54 Sol. Jo. tax, as it affects 133, 47 Scot. L. R. 593; People v. Pasecedent; it does not field, 284 Ill. 450, 120 N. E. 286; - or privilege, and the Roebling's Estate, 89 N. J. Eq. 166, 104 date and unavoidable. Atl. 295; Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & T. Co. 158 U. S. 601, 39 L. ed. 1108, 15 Sup. Ct. Rep. 912; Gallatin, Sketch of Finances of United States, published in 1796; Brushaber v. Union P. R. Co. 240 U. S. 1, 19, 60 L. ed. 493, 502, L.R.A.1917D, 414, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 236, Ann. Cas. 1917B 713; Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U. S. 189, 205, 64 L. ed. 521, 528, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 189; Knowlton v. Moore, 178 U. S. 41, 44 L. ed. 969, 20 Sup. Ct. Rep. 747.

v. United States, 39 med in 199 U. S. 437, 50 Sup. Ct. Rep. 110; Nicol 3. S. 509, 521, 43 L. ed. Sup. Ct. Rep. 522; FairUnited States, 181 U. S. 283, 1. ed. S62, 866, 21 Sup. Ct. Rep. Fat v. Stone Tracy Co. 220 U. S. 55 L. ed. 389, 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 342, Am. Cas. 1912B, 1312;

Thomas

V.

ted States, 192 U. S. 363, 48 L. ed. 481, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 305; McCoach v. Minehill & S. H. R. Co. 228 U. S. 295, 37 L. ed. 842, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 419; Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & T. Co. 157 U. S. 429, 39 L. ed. 759, 15 Sup. Ct. Rep. 673; Billings v. United States, 232 U. S. 261, 58 L. ed. 596, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 421; Pierce v. United States, 232 U. S. 290, 291, 58 L. ed. 609, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 427;| United States v. Goelet, 232 U. S. 293, 58 L. ed. 610, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 431; United States v. Bennett, 232 U. S. 299, 58 L. ed. 612, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 433; Scholey v. Rew, 23 Wall. 331, 23 L. ed. 99; Ashley v. Ryan, 153 U. S. 436, 441, 446, 38 L. ed. 773, 776, 778, 4 Inters. Com. Rep. 664, 14 Sup. Ct. Rep. 865; Patton v. Brady, 184 U. S. 608, 617, 618, 46 L. ed. 713, 718, 719, 22 Sup. Ct. Rep. 493; Spreckels Sugar Ref. Co. v. MeClain, 192 U. S. 397, 401, 403, 48 L. ed. 496, 498, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 376; Eliot v. Freeman, 220 U. S. 178, 187, 55 L. ed. 424, 428, 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 360; United | States v. Whitridge, 231 U. S. 144, 147, 58 L. ed. 159, 161, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 24; Anderson v. Forty-Two Broadway Co. 239 U. S. 69, 72, 60 L. ed. 152, 154, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 17.

The words "the transfer of," in the phrase, "is hereby imposed upon the transfer of the net estate of every decedent," are of no effect, and cannot overcome the actual character of the exaction.

Flint v. Stone Tracy Co. 220 U. S. 107, 145, 55 L. ed. 389, 411, 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 342, Ann. Cas. 1912B, 1312; Pace v. Burgess, 92 U. S. 372, 376, 23 L. ed. 657, 660; Inman S. S. Co. v. Tinker, 94 U. S. 238, 244, 24 L. ed. 118, 122; Kentucky R. Tax Cases, 115 U. S. 321, 29 L. ed. 414, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 57; Knowlton v. Moore, 178 U. S. 41, 80, 83, 44 L. ed. 969, 985, 986, 20 Sup. Ct. Rep. 747; Helwig v. United States, 188 U. S. 605, 611, 47 L. ed. 614, 616, 23 Sup. Ct. Rep. 427; Western U. Teleg. Co. v. Kansas, 216 U. S. 1, 27, 54 L. ed. 355, 366, 30 Sup. Ct. Rep. 190; Ludwig v. Western U. Teleg. Co. 216 U. S. 146, 162, 54 L. ed. 423, 429, 30 Sup. Ct. Rep. 380; Kansas City Ft. S. & M. R. Co. v. Botkin, 240 U. S. 227, 231, 235, 60 L. ed. 617, 618, 620, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 261; Wagner v. Covington, 251 U. S. 95, 102, 64 L. ed. 157, 167, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 93; Galveston, H. & S. A. R. Co. v.

The exaction complained of is a mere unjustifiable taking of private property without due process of law.

State Tax on Foreign-held Bonds, 15 Wall. 300, 321, 21 L. ed. 179, 187; Thomas v. Gay, 169 U. S. 264, 283, 42 L. ed. 710, 747, 18 Sup. Ct. Rep. 340; Scott v. McNeal, 154 U. S. 34, 45, 38 L. ed. 896, 901, 14 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1108; Norwood v. Baker, 172 U. S. 269, 43 L. ed. 443, 19 Sup. Ct. Rep. 187; French v. Barber Asphalt Paving Co. 181 U. S. 324, 344, 45 L. ed. 879, 889, 21 Sup. Ct. Rep. 625; Wight v. Davidson, 181 U. S. 371, 384, 385, 45 L. ed. 900, 906, 907, 21 Sup. Ct. Rep. 616; Ballard v. Hunter, 204 U. S. 241, 256, 51 L. ed. 461, 472, 27 Sup. Ct. Rep. 261; Phillip Wagner v. Leser, 239 U.. S. 207, 220, 60 L. ed. 230, 237, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 66; Brushaber v. Union P. R. Co. 240 U. S. 1, 24, 25 60 L. ed. 493, 504, L.R.A.1917D 414, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 236, Ann. Cas. 1917B, 713; Green v. Frazier, 253 U. S. 233, 238, 239, 64 L. ed. 878, 881, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 499.

Taxpayers are entitled to a liberal construction of § 203.

Texas, 210 U. S. 217, 227, 52 L. ed. | Gore, 253 U. S. 245, 64 L. ed. 887, 11 1031, 1037, 28 Sup. Ct. Rep. 638; St. A.L.R. 519, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 550. Louis Southwestern R. Co. v. Arkansas, 235 U. S. 350, 362, 59 L. ed. 265, 271, 35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 99; Mugler v. Kansas, 123 U. S. 623, 661, 31 L. ed. 205, 210, 8 Sup. Ct. Rep. 273; Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & T. Co. 157 U. S. 429, 39 L. ed. 759, 15 Sup. Ct. Rep. 673; Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 419, 444, 6 L. ed. 678, 687; Weston v. Charleston, 2 Pet. 449, 7 L. ed. 481; Dobbins v. Erie County, 16 Pet. 435, 10 L. ed. 1022; Almy v. California, 24 How. 169, 174, 16 L. ed. 644, 646; Crandall v. Nevada, 6 Wall. 35, 18 L. ed. 745; Northern C. R. Co. v. Jackson, 7 Wall. 262, 19 L. ed. 88; Welton v. Missouri, 91 Ú. S. 275, 23 L. ed. 347; Henderson v. New York, 92 U. S. 259, 268, 23 L. ed. 543, 547; Cook v. Pennsylvania, 97 U. S. 566, 568, 24 L. ed. 1015; Western U. Teleg. Co. v. Texas. 105 U. S. 460, 465, 26 L. ed. 1067, 1068; Tennessee v. Whitworth, 117 U. S. 129, 135, 29 L. ed. 830, 831, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. | 645; Philadelphia & S. Mail S. S. Co. v. Pennsylvania, 122 U. S. 326, 336, 30 | L. ed. 1200, 1201, 1 Inters. Com. Rep. 308, 7 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1118; Western U. Teleg. Co. v. Atty-Gen. 125 U. S. 530, 552, 31 L. ed. 790, 794, 8 Sup. Ct. Rep. 961; Leloup v. Mobile, 127 U. S. 649, 32 | L. ed. 311, 2 Inters. Com. Rep. 134, 8 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1380; Postal Teleg. Cable Co. v. Adams, 155 U. S. 688, 698, 39 L. ed. 311, 316, 5 Inters. Com. Rep. 1, 15 Sup. Ct. Rep. 268, 360; Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v Chicago, 166 U. S. 226, 235, 41 L. ed. 979, 984, 17 Sup. Ct. Rep. 581; Smyth v. Ames, 169 U. S. 466, 527, 42; L. ed. 819, 842, 18 Sup. Ct. Rep. 418; Nicol v. Ames, 173 U. S. 509, 516, 43 L. ed. 786, 792, 19 Sup. Ct. Rep. 522; Fairbank v. United States, 181 U. S. 283, 296, 45 L. ed. 862, 868, 21 Sup. Ct. Rep. 648, 15 Am. Crim. Rep. 135; McCray v. United States, 195 U. S. 27, 59, 49 L. ed. 78, 97, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 769, 1 Ann. Cas. 561; Prentis v. Atlantic Coast Line Co. 211 U. S. 210, 226, 53 L. ed. 150, 158, 29 Sup. Ct. Rep. 67; Pullman Co. v. Kansas, 216 U. S. 56, 54 L. ed. 378, 30 Sup. Ct. Rep. 232; Brushaber v. Union P. R. Co. 240 U. S. 1, 16, 60 L. ed. 493, 501, L.R.A.1917D, 414, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 236, Ann. Cas. 1917B, 713; Bullen v. Wisconsin, 240 U. S. 625, 630, 631, 60 L. ed. 830, 835, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 473; Shaffer v. Carter, 252 U. S. 37, 55, 64 L. ed. 445, 457, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 221; Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U. S. 189, 64 L. ed. 521, 9 A.L.R. 1570, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 189; Evans v.

Gould v. Gould, 245 U. S. 151, 62 L. ed. 211, 38 Sup. Ct. Rep. 63; Vanhorne v. Dorrance, 2 Dall. 304, 316, 1 L. ed. 391, 396, Fed. Cas. No. 16,857; United States v. Isham, 17 Wall. 496, 504, 21 L. ed. 728, 730; Tennessee v. Whitworth, 117 U. S. 129, 137, 29 L. ed. 830, 832, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 645; Hartranft v. Wiegmann, 121 U. S. 609, 30 L. ed. 1012, 7 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1240; Benziger v. United States, 192 U. S. 38, 55, 48 L. ed. 331, 338, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 189; American Net & Twine Co. v. Worthington, 141 U. S. 468, 35 L. ed. 821, 12 Sup. Ct. Rep. 55; Treat v. White, 181 U. S. 264, 267, 45 L. ed. 853, 854, 21 Sup. Ct. Rep. 611; Eidman v. Martinez, 184 U. S. 578, 583, 46 L. ed. 697, 701, 22 Sup. Ct. Rep. 515; Crocker v. Malley, 249 U. S. 223, 233, 63 L. ed. 573, 576, 2 A.L.R. 1601, 37 Sup. Ct. Rep. 270; Edwards v. Wabash R. Co. C. C. A., 264 Fed. 618; United States v. Wigglesworth, 2 Story, 373, Fed. Cas. No. 16,690; Re Ullmann, 263 Ill. 530, 51 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1075, 105 N. E. 292, Ann. Cas. 1915C, 321; Martin L. Hall Co. v. Com. 215 Mass. 329, 102 N. E. 364; Atty-Gen. v. Clark, 222 Mass. 294, L.R.A.1916C, 679, 110 N. E. 299, Ann. Cas. 1917B, 119; Hill v. Treasurer, 229 Mass. 475, L.R.A.1918D, 337, 118 N. E. 891; Re Cooley, 186 N. Y. 220, 10 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1010, 78 N. E. 939; State

157 U. S. 429, 557, 39 L. ed. 759, 810, 15 Sup. Ct. Rep. 673; Thomas v. United States, 192 U. S. 363, 369, 370, 48 L. ed. 481, 483, 484, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 305; Hawke v. Smith, 253 U. S. 221, 227, 64 L. ed. 871, 10 A.L.R. 1504, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 495; Veazie Bank v. Fenno, 8 Wall. 533, 544, 19 L. ed. 482, 486; Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U. S. 189, 205, 206, 64 L. ed. 521, 528, 9 A.L.R. 1570, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 189; Nicol v. Ames, 173 U. S. 509, 519, 521, 43 L. ed. 786, 793, 794, 19 Sup. Ct. Rep. 522; Flint v. Stone Tracy Co. 220 U. S. 107, 55 L. ed. 389, 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 342, Ann. Cas. 1912B, 1312; Pierce v. United States, 232 U. S. 290, 291, 58 L. ed. 609, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 427; Knowlton v. Moore, 178 U. S. 41, 59, 44 L. ed. 969, 977, 20 Sup. Ct. Rep. 747. The exaction lacks the essential characteristics of an excise tax, as it affects the estate of every decedent; it does not rest upon any right or privilege, and the demand is absolute and unavoidable.

South Carolina v. United States, 39 Ct. Cl. 286, affirmed in 199 U. S. 437, 50 L. ed. 261, 26 Sup. Ct. Rep. 110; Nicol v. Ames, 173 U. S. 509, 521, 43 L. ed. 786, 793, 19 Sup. Ct. Rep. 522; Fairbank v. United States, 181 U. S. 283, 293, 45 L. ed. 862, 866, 21 Sup. Ct. Rep. 648; Flint v. Stone Tracy Co. 220 U. S. 107, 55 L. ed. 389, 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 342, Ann. Cas. 1912B, 1312; Thomas v. United States, 192 U. S. 363, 48 L. ed. 481, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 305; McCoach v. Minehill & S. H. R. Co. 228 U. S. 295, 57 L. ed. 842, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 419; Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & T. Co. 157 U. S. 429, 39 L. ed. 759, 15 Sup. Ct. Rep. 673; Billings v. United States, 232 U. S. 261, 58 L. ed. 596, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 421; Pierce v. United States, 232 U. S. 290, 291, 58 L. ed. 609, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 427; United States v. Goelet, 232 U. S. 293, 58 L. ed. 610, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 431; United States v. Bennett, 232 U. S. 299, 58 L. ed. 612, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 433; Scholey v. Rew, 23 Wall. 331, 23 L. ed. 99; Ashley v. Ryan, 153 U. S. 436, 441, 446, 38 L. ed. 773, 776, 778, 4 Inters. Com. Rep. 664, 14 Sup. Ct. Rep. 865; Patton v. Brady, 184 U. S. 608, 617, 618, 46 L. ed. 713, 718, 719, 22 Sup. Ct. Rep. 493; Spreckels Sugar Ref. Co. v. MeClain, 192 U. S. 397, 401, 403, 48 L. ed. 496, 498, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 376; Eliot v. Freeman, 220 U. S. 178, 187, 55 L. ed. 424, 428, 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 360; United States v. Whitridge, 231 U. S. 144, 147, 58 L. ed. 159, 161, 34 Sup. Ct. Rep. 24; Anderson v. Forty-Two Broadway Co. 239 U. S. 69, 72, 60 L. ed. 152, 154, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 17.

The exaction is a tax upon property by reason of its ownership.

Re Swift, 137 N. Y. 85, 18 L.R.A. 709, 32 N. E. 1096; United States v. Perkins, 163 U. S. 625, 629, 41 L. ed. 287, 288, 16 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1073; Re Vanderbilt, 172 N. Y. 74, 64 N. E. 782; Re Keeney, 194 N. Y. 285, 87 N. E. 428, affirmed in 222 U. S. 525, 56 L. ed. 299, 38 L.R.A.(N.S.) 1139, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 105; Flint v. Stone Tracy Co. 20 U. S. 107, 163, 164, 55 L. ed. 389, 418, 419, 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 342, Ann. Cas. 1912B, 1312; Hanson, Death Duties, 4th ed. p. 63; Atty. Gen. v. Beech, [1899] A. C. 53, 68 L. J. Q. B. N. S. 130, 63 J. P. 116, 47 Week. Rep. 257, 79 L. T. N. S. 565, 15 Times L. R. 85; Winans v. Atty. Gen. [1910] A. C. 27, 79 L. J. K. B. N. S. 156, 101 L. T. N. S. 754, 26 Times L. R. 133, 54 Sol. Jo. 133, 47 Scot. L. R. 593; People v. Pasfield, 284 Ill. 450, 120 N. E. 286; Roebling's Estate, 89 N. J. Eq. 166, 104 Atl. 295; Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & T. Co. 158 U. S. 601, 39 L. ed. 1108, 15 Sup. Ct. Rep. 912; Gallatin, Sketch of Finances of United States, published in 1796; Brushaber v. Union P. R. Co. 240 U. S. 1, 19, 60 L. ed. 493, 502, L.R.A.1917D, 414, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 236, Ann. Cas. 1917B 713; Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U. S. 189, 205, 64 L. ed. 521, 528, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 189; Knowlton v. Moore, 178 U. S. 41, 44 L. ed. 969, 20 Sup. Ct. Rep. 747.

The words "the transfer of," in the phrase, "is hereby imposed upon the transfer of the net estate of every decedent," are of no effect, and cannot overcome the actual character of the exaction.

Flint v. Stone Tracy Co. 220 U. S. 107, 145, 55 L. ed. 389, 411, 31 Sup. Ct. Rep. 342, Ann. Cas. 1912B, 1312; Pace v. Burgess, 92 U. S. 372, 376, 23 L. ed. 657, 660; Inman S. S. Co. v. Tinker, 94 U. S. 238, 244, 24 L. ed. 118, 122; Kentucky R. Tax Cases, 115 U. S. 321, 29 L. ed. 414, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 57; Knowlton v. Moore, 178 U. S. 41, 80, 83, 44 L. ed. 969, 985, 986, 20 Sup. Ct. Rep. 747; Helwig v. United States, 188 U. S. 605, 611, 47 L. ed. 614, 616, 23 Sup. Ct. Rep. 427; Western U. Teleg. Co. v. Kansas, 216 U. S. 1, 27, 54 L. ed. 355, 366, 30 Sup. Ct. Rep. 190; Ludwig v. Western U. Teleg. Co. 216 U. S. 146, 162, 54 L. ed. 423, 429, 30 Sup. Ct. Rep. 380; Kansas City Ft. S. & M. R. Co. v. Botkin, 240 U. S. 227, 231, 235, 60 L. ed. 617, 618, 620, 36 Sup. Ct. Rep. 261; Wagner v. Covington, 251 U. S. 95, 102, 64 L. ed. 157, 167, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 93; Galveston, H. & S. A. R. Co. v.

« ForrigeFortsett »