Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

12 La. 332

State v. Nathan

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided December 15, 1845

Supreme Court of Louisiana · decided 1845-12-15

The law imposing the tax on brokers is unconstitutional. First: Because Congress has the exclusive power to regulate commerce. The power to regulate, implies the power to preserve. The State cannot have power to destroy or impair what Congress has the power to preserve and regulate ; therefore, the State cannot tax the instruments whereby Congress exercises its constitutional powers. 4 Wheat. 428, 432. An unlimited power to tax, is a power to destroy. Ib. 428, 432.

Decided 1845-12-15

MartiN, J.

¶1These are two consolidated cases, in which the State has recovered a tax imposed by the legislature, in the year 1842, upon money and exchange brokers. The only question submitted to our consideration, is the constitutionality of the tax. We have been favored with a very long and printed brief, in which the unconstitutionality is sought to be established, on the ground, that the power of unequal and partial taxation was never delegated to the legislature, and that this tax is contrary to the provisions of the constitution of the United States, it. being a tax on commerce, which Congress alone has the power to regulate.

¶2It does not appear to us that the District Court erred. The general assembly of this State is vested with all the legislative powers, even including that of unequal and partial taxation, al*334though the State constitution does not grant it in express terms. Its attributes differ in this respect from those of Congress, which are limited to those actually granted. The tax under consideration is not more a tax on commerce, than that on stores and warehouses, &c.

¶3Judgment affirmed.

/12/la/332 · .json · Public domain