Page:Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (1st ed, 1833, vol II).djvu/506

 498 in the case of M'Culloch v. The State of Manyland, when it was thoroughly argued, and deliberately considered. The question decided in that case bears a near resemblance to that, which is involved in this. It was discussed at the bar in all its relations, and examined by the Court with its utmost attention. We will not repeat the reasoning, which conducted us to the conclusion thus formed; but that conclusion was, that "all subjects, over which the sovereign power of a state extends, are objects of taxation; but those, over which it does not extend, are, upon the soundest principles, exempt from taxation." "The sovereignty of a state extends to every thing, which exists by its own authority, or is introduced by its permission;" but not "to those means, which are employed by congress to carry into execution powers conferred on that body by the people of the United States." "The attempt to use" the power of taxation "on the means employed by the government of the Union, in pursuance of the constitution, is itself an abuse; because it is the usurpation of a power, which the people of a single state cannot give." "The states have no power by taxation, or otherwise, to retard, impede, burthen, or in any manner control the operation of the constitutional laws, enacted by congress to carry into execution the powers vested in the general government." We retain the opinions, which were then expressed. A contract made by the government in the exercise of its power, to borrow money on the credit of the United States, is undoubtedly independent of the will of any state, in which the individual, who lends, may reside; and is undoubtedly an operation essential