Stamp

An impression made by order of the government, on paper, which must be used in reducing certain contracts to writing, for the purpose of raising a revenue. See Starkie, Ev.; 1 Phil. Ev. 444. A paper bearing an impression or device authorized by law, and adapted for attachment to some subject of duty or excise. The term in American law is used often in distinction from "stamped paper," which latter meaning, as well as that of the device or impression itself, is included in the broader signification of the word. Stamps or stamped paper are prepared under the direction of officers of the government, and sold at a price equal to the duty or excise to be collected. The stamps are affixed and cancelled; and where stamped paper is used, one use obviously prevents a second use. The internal revenue acts of the United States of 1862 and subsequent years require stamps to be also under penalty of invalidating written instruments, and rendering them incapable of being produced in evidence.

An impression made by order of the government, on paper, which must be used in reducing certain contracts to writing, for the purpose of raising a revenue. See Stark. Ev.; 1 Phill. Ev. 444. A paper bearing an impression or device authorized by law and adopted for attachment to some subject of duty or excise. The term in American law is used often in distinction from stamped paper, which latter meaning, as well as that of the device or impression itself, is included in the broader signification of the word. Stamps or stamped paper are prepared under the direction of otiicers of the government, and sold at a price equal to the duty or excise to be collected. The stamps are affixed and cancelled; and where stamped paper is used, one use obviously prevents a second use. The Internal Revenue acts of 1862 and subsequent years required stamps to be affixed to a great variety of subjects, under severe penalties in the way of fines, and also under penalty of invalidating written instruments and rendering them incapable of being produced in evidence. The statutes under which these stamps were required had been repealed from time to time, and that method of raising revenue was discontinued except in the case of tobacco and possibly some other articles. The necessity of raising additional revenue to meet the expenditures required for the Spanish-Anierican war of 1898 led to the passage of what was known as the War Revenue Act of June 13, 1898, under which stamps were required on checks, drafts, notes, mortgages, and other instruments. The stamp tax on a memorandum or contract of sale of a certificate of stock imposed by this act is not unconstitutional as a direct tax on property; Thomas v. U. S., 192 U. S. 363, 24 Sup. Ct. 305, 48 L. Ed. 481. By Act March 2, 1901, the schedule of the act was amended by omitting all such instruments; it took effect at the end of the fiscal year, June 30, 1901. The entire schedule A was repealed April 12, 1902, saving the effect of the act as to stamping instruments while it was in force; Sackett v. Mc Caffrey, 131 Fed. 219, 65 C. C. A. 205. An action lies by the United States to reties provided in the act for non-compliance therewith are not exclusive of collection by suit. An action lies wherever there is a sum due, either certain or readily reduced to certainty; provisions for penalties do not necessarily exclude personal liability; they were provided to induce payment of the tax and not as a substitute for payment; U. S. v. Chamberlin, 219 U. S. 250, 31 Sup. Ct 155, 55 L. Ed. 204. Instruments not duly stamped are not void or inadmissible in evidence, in the absence of a fraudulent intent; Mc Govern v. Hoesback, 53 Pa. 176; Rheinstrom v. Cone, 26 Wis. 163, 7 Am. Rep. 51; Moore v. Moore, 47 N. Y. 467, 7 Am. Rep. 466; in the absence of affirmative proof, a fraudulent intent will not be presumed; cases supra. Where objection is made to the admission of a writing for lack of a revenue stamp, the burden is on the objector to show that the stamp was omitted with intent to evade the law; Ohio River Junction R. Co. v. Pennsylvania Co., 222 Pa. 573, 72 Atl. 271. Where a United States act required a revenue stamp to be attached to a written instrument, and none was attached, the instrument is admissible in evidence after the repeal of the act without a reservation of the right to demand the tax when omitted during the operation of the act or to enforce the penalties or forfeiture for such omission; id. If a foreign instrument is, by the laws of the country where it is made, void for want of a stamp, it cannot be enforced in England. But if those laws merely require that it must be stamped before it can be received in evidence there, it is admissible in England without a stamp; 5 Exch. 279. The absence of an English revenue stamp from a power of attorney does not render the instrument inadmissible in evidence in an American court; Linton v. Ins. Co., 104 Fed. 584, 44 C. C. A. 54. Under the previous revenue acts imposing stamp taxes the question arose as to the exact legal effect of the requirement that an instrument should be stamped, and whether if an unstamped instrument was wholly invalid the law made it necessary to have certain contracts in writing which would otherwise be valid by parol, as for instance, the contract of insurance. The suggestion that the passage of these laws requiring a stamp might make it necessary that such contracts should be in writing was made in Western Massachusetts Ins. Co. v. Duffey, 2 Kan. 347; but this doctrine is said not to be well founded; 1 May, Ins., 3d ed. § 25; and In New York it was held that the validity of a parol contract for Insurance was not affected by the stamp act, that, if in writing, it would require to be stamped, but it might be oral; Fish v. Cottenet, 44 N. Y. 538, 4 Am. Rep. 715. The power of congress to declare unand the doubt went so far as to deny the constitutional right of the federal government to determine rules of evidence by which the state courts should be governed; May, Ins. § 85; Green v. Holway, 101 Mass. 243, 3 Am. Rep. 339. Some of the cases hold that congress cannot prohibit the making of contracts permitted by state laws, and that to declare them void is not a proper penalty for the enforcement of tax laws; Cooley, Const. Lim., 6th ed. 592; Moore v. Quirk, 105 Mass. 49, 7 Am. Rep. 499; Warren v. Paul, 22 Ind. 276; Smith v. Short, 40 Ala. 385; Jones v. Keep’s Estate, 19 Wis. 369; Knox v. Rossi, 25 Nev. 96, 57 Pac. 179, 83 Am. St. Rep. 566, (48 L. R. A. 305 and note), as to the effect of omission to stamp instruments.

An impression made by public authority, ip pursuance of law, upon paper or parchment, upon which certain legal proceedings, conveyances or contracts are required to be written, and for which a tax or duty is exacted. A small label or strip of paper, bearing a particular device, printed and sold by the government, and required to be attached M mail-matter, and to seme other articles sui Ject to duty or excise.

— Stamp acts. In English law. Acts regulat ing the stamps upon deeds, contracts, agreements, papers in law proceedings, bills and notes letters, receipts,' and other papers.

— Stamp duties. Duties imposed upon and raised from stamps upon parchment and paper, and forming a branch of the perpetual revenue of the kingdom. 1 Bl. Comm. 323.

A label or printed device adapted to be attached to some subject of charge or taxation, and prescribed by law to be so attached, as evidence that the proper sum has been paid.

revenue, is an impression made on paper, by order of the government, which must be used in reducing certain contracts to writrevenue. Vide Stark. Ev. h. t.3 1 Phil. Ev. 444. Inthe United States there are now no stamp dutics.