Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 16.pdf/247

 204

The Green Bag

diction if the ship and its company are alone But in Maine v. Grand Trunk Ry. (142 U. affected. S. 217), the majority of the court reached a 4. That, as to whether they are alone af conclusion which seems to be opposed to the fected in cases of crimes seems even where earlier cases. A statute of Maine required there is no direct injury to any other, a that every corporation, person, or associa-, question dependent upon the gravity of the tion operating a railroad in the State should crime, and one upon which the cases are not pay an annual excise tax for the privilege of agreed. exercising its franchise in the State. The 5. That, as to whether, in matters of pri amount of the tax was to be ascertained as vate right, the courts of the locality are comfollows: the gross receipts were to be divided pellable to enforce local law against a foreign by the number of miles of road operated, ship, and those upon it, in local waters, de and the resulting average, multiplied by the pends upon extremely diverse interpretations number of miles operated within the State, of local law, as intended, or not intended, was to be the basis of taxation. This statute to so apply. was held not to be opposed to the Constitu 6. That local law enacted by any State tion of the United States. . . . may, by its terms, be made applicable to such This case also has been many times cited foreign vessels and their crews coming with approval. Some of the points apparently within the territory, and will then be enforced decided in it, however, can hardly be sup against them by the local courts. ported. The ground seemingly taken by the 7. That it can not be said that any es majority, that the tax might be supported as tablished principle of international law pre an excise tax for the privilege of coming into serves any measure of absolute independence the State, is certainly unsound; for later as to private vessels in territorial waters, al well as earlier cases agree that a State can though it comes near to preserving, and per not exclude from its territory a corporation haps does preserve, such independence for

an individual engaged in interstate com government vessels. merce or in the service of the national gov PROFESSOR JOSEPH H. BEALE, JR.. discusses ernment. But the authority of the case being in the Harvard Law Review for February, I recognized, some more tenable ground must various problems of "Taxation of Foreign be found on which to place the decision. It Corporations." On one interesting question will probably be found in the later case of which has arisen he says: Postal Telegraph Cable Co. v. Adams (155 How far a tax upon the receipts of a cor U. S. 688). A statute of Mississippi laid poration from interstate business may be upon all telegraph companies, domestic as taxed has not been altogether clear on the well as foreign, a tax for the privilege of authorities. In 1873 the Supreme Court carrying on their business, graduated in each in the case of the State Tax on Railway case upon the amount of property in miles Gross Receipts (15 Wall. 284) held that such and its value; and exempted them from all a tax was valid. But in a later case (Fargo other taxation. It was found in the case that v. Michigan, 121 U. S. 230) the authority the burden of this tax was less than the ordi of this case was shaken. The case was dis nary tax on the same amount of property. tinguished from the State Tax on Railway The court said that although a franchise tax Gross Receipts on two grounds: first, that upon a corporation engaged in interstate in the earlier case the corporation taxed was commerce is invalid, and although this pur a domestic corporation, but in the case at ported to be a franchise tax, yet the sub bar a foreign corporation; second, that in stance rather than the shadow was to be the case at bar the receipts taxed had never looked at. This tax was in lieu of another come into Michigan and there been mingled tax on property, and did in fact stand for a with the other property of the company. The tax on the intangible property within the tax was held invalid., State, and it was therefore valid.