Noah Haynes Swayne

Name: Springer v. United States — Opinion of the Court
Author: Noah Haynes Swayne

Springer v. United States — Opinion of the Court

Summary

“Springer v. United States — Opinion of the Court”, is a work by Noah Haynes Swayne. It explores elements such as tax, capitation and Constitution.

Quotes from Springer v. United States — Opinion of the Court (Noah Haynes Swayne)

Noah Haynes Swayne, Springer v. United States — Opinion of the Court

“ It is a matter of regret that terms so uncertain and vague in so important a point are to be found in the Constitution. We shall seek in vain for any antecedent settled legal meaning to the respective terms. There is none. We shall be as much at a loss to find any disposition of either which can satisfactorily determine the point.' There being many carriages in some of the States, and very few in others, he points out the preposterous consequences if such a tax be laid and collected on the principle of apportionment instead of the rule of uniformity. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Noah Haynes Swayne, Springer v. United States — Opinion of the Court

“ It was well held that where such evils would attend the apportionment of a tax, the Constitution could not have intended that an apportionment should be made. This view applies with even greater force to the tax in question in this case. Where the population is large and the incomes are few and small, it would be intolerably oppressive. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Noah Haynes Swayne, Springer v. United States — Opinion of the Court

“ He insists that if the tax there in question was a direct tax, so would be a tax on ships, according to their tonnage. He suggests that the boundary line between direct and indirect taxes be settled by 'a species of arbitration,' and that direct taxes be held to be only 'capitation or poll taxes, and taxes on lands and buildings, and general assessments, whether on the whole property of individuals or on their whole real or personal estate. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Noah Haynes Swayne, Springer v. United States — Opinion of the Court

“ The prompt payment of taxes is always important to the public welfare. It may be vital to the existence of a government. The idea that every tax-payer is entitled to the delays of litigation is unreason. If the laws here in question involved any wrong or unnecessary harshness, it was for Congress, or the people who make congresses, to see that the evil was corrected. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Noah Haynes Swayne, Springer v. United States — Opinion of the Court

“ United States Supreme Court
102 U.S. 586
Springer v. United States
The central and controlling question in this case is whether the tax which was levied on the income, gains, and profits of the plaintiff in error, as set forth in the record, and by pretended virtue of the acts of Congress and parts of acts therein mentioned, is a direct tax. It is fundamental with respect to the rights of the parties and the result of the case. It will be last considered. Many of the other points made by the plaintiff in error reproduce the same thing in different forms of language. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Noah Haynes Swayne, Springer v. United States — Opinion of the Court

“ For example, suppose two States equal in census to pay eighty thousand dollars each by a tax on carriages of eight dollars on every carriage; and in one State there are one hundred carriages, and in the other one thousand. The owners of carriages in one State would pay ten times the tax of owners in the other. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Noah Haynes Swayne, Springer v. United States — Opinion of the Court

“ The difference in the ability of communities, without reference to numbers, to pay any taxes is forcibly remarked upon by McCulloh in his article on taxation in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, vol. xxi. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Noah Haynes Swayne, Springer v. United States — Opinion of the Court

“ The latter was by requisitions upon the several States. The delays and difficulties in procuring the compliance of the States, it is known, was one of the causes that led to the adoption of the present Constitution. This clause of the articles throws no light on the question we are called upon to consider. Nor does the journal of the proceedings of the constitutional convention of 1787 contain anything of much value relating to the subject. ”

Noah Haynes Swayne

Summary

Quotes from Springer v. United States — Opinion of the Court (Noah Haynes Swayne)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature