that the power of taxation has no other limit than is found in the 10th section of the 1st article of the constitution; that, with respect to everything else, the power of the States is supreme, and admits of no control. If this be true, the distinction between property and other subjects to which the power of taxation is applicable, is merely arbitrary, and can never be sustained. This is not all. If the controlling power of the States be estab- State sovlished; if their supremacy as to taxation be ac- ereignty had knowledged; what is to restrain their exercising cry of the this control in any shape they may please to give Jeffersonian Republican it? Their sovereignty is not confined to taxation. party at That is not the only mode in which it might be dis- the outset. played. The question is, in truth, a question of supremacy; and if the right of the States to tax the means employed by the general government be conceded, the declaration that the constitution, and

been the war

the laws made in pursuance thereof, shall be the Note the supreme law of the land, is empty and unmeaning Nullification controversy declamation. of 1832-33.

...

The court has bestowed on this subject its most deliberate consideration. The result is a conviction that the States have no power, by taxation or otherwise, to retard, impede, burden, or in any manner control, the operations of the constitutional laws enacted by Congress to carry into execution the powers vested in the general government. This is, we think, the unavoidable consequence of that supremacy which the constitution has declared.

We are unanimously of opinion, that the law passed by the legislature of Maryland, imposing a tax on the Bank of the United States, is unconstitutional and void.

Actual state rights are not

in this deci

This opinion does not deprive the States of any limited or inresources which they originally possessed. It does fringed upon, not extend to a tax paid by the real property of sion, but the bank, in common with the other real property they are within the State, nor to a tax imposed on the in- extent.

defined in

Not the first
instance of
quashing a
state law by

Federal
Courts.

terests which the citizens of Maryland may hold in this institution, in common with other property of the same description throughout the State. But this is a tax on the operations of the bank, and is, consequently, a tax on the operation of an instrument employed by the government of the Union to carry its powers into execution. Such a tax must be unconstitutional.

On consideration whereof, it is the opinion of this court, that the act of the legislature of Maryland is contrary to the Constitution of the United States, and void. . . . It is therefore adjudged and ordered, that the said judgment of the said court of appeals of the State of Maryland, in this case, be, and the same hereby is, reversed and annulled. And this court, proceeding to render such judgment as the said court of appeals should have rendered, it is further adjudged and ordered, that the judgment of the said Baltimore county court be reversed and annulled, and that judgment be entered in the said Baltimore county court for the said James W. M'Culloch.

CONTEMPORARY EXPOSITION

NILES' REGISTER (1819)

Having so long entertained such opinions as incontrovertible truths, and as a weak, but honest apostle in the cause of mankind, endeavoured to impress them upon all within our reach, the horror of an apprehension that we have deceived ourselves and others, may be better felt than described: it is like to a man discovering the infidelity of his wife whilst she reposes on his bosom, and heart seems united to heart! A deadly blow has been struck at the sovereignty of the states, and from a quarter so far removed from the people as to be hardly accessible to public opinion it is needless to say that we allude to the decision of the supreme court, in the case of McCulloch versus the State of Maryland, by which it is estab

lished that the states cannot tax the bank of the United States.

But we believe that the broad question is settled, for the National Intelligencer of Monday last, giving an account of the proceedings of the supreme court on Saturday, says — " Mr. chief justice Marshall delivered the unanimous opinion of the court in the case of McCulloch against the state of Maryland. "1st. That congress had, constitutionally, a right to establish the banks of the United States.

"2dly. That the bank has authority to establish branches in such states of the Union as it thinks fit.

"3dly. That the state of Maryland has no right to tax the branch of the bank established in that state."

We are awfully impressed with a conviction that the welfare of the union has received a more dangerous wound than fifty Hartford conventions, hateful as that assemblage was, could inflict-reaching so close to the vitals as seemingly to draw the heart's blood of liberty and safety, and which may be wielded to destroy the whole revenues, and so do away the sovereignties of the states. In the progress of this principle, we can easily anticipate the time when some daring scoundrel, having fortified himself by soul-trading incorporations, may seize upon these fair countries for a kingdom, and, surrounded with obedient judges and lying priests, punish his opponents, after the manner of European despots, with fines, imprisonment and tortures here, and the terrors of the lower world hereafter. But we will not despair of the republic, nor yet give up the ship; no alternative, however, is left to preserve the sovereignty of the states but by amending the constitution of the United States, and more clearly defining the original intentions of that instrument in several respects, but especially in regard to incorporations: - these are evidences of sovereignty; congress has not a sovereign power, except in the cases specially delegated.

Hezekiah Niles, in Niles' “Weekly Register." XVI. 43.

FREEMAN'S JOURNAL (1819)

"The book!" Something is still said in Philadelphia about the book found in the office of the Bank of the United States

66

at Baltimore. It is probable, that the eminent appellation of this thing will be lost, by finding three or four similar books at other places! We have good reason to believe that attempts have been made to rival Baltimore in speculation! . . . City Bank of Baltimore.' The board of directors elected since the blow up" of this bank, have, at length, appointed a day for laying a statement of the affairs of the institution before the stockholders - viz., the 20th of October next. This distant date, after so long a delay, has excited no little surprise; but we are told by those we have a right to believe, that the books and accounts of this bank were in such a state of confusion, that an earlier period could not be fixed upon, though the new cashier and clerks, (well skilled in accounts) had laboured and were yet labouring excessively, to ascertain the true state of the bank! ! !

The stock of this bank is quoted by the brokers at $7 for 15 paid..

"Bad Times!" Honesty has fled from the world, and Sincerity is fallen asleep - Piety has hidden herself, and Justice cannot find the way the Helper is not at home, and Charity lies sick; Benevolence is under arrest, and Faith is nearly extinguished; the Virtues go a begging, and Truth has long since been buried; Credit has turned crazy, and Conscience is nailed on the wall.

Quoted in Niles' "Weekly Register." XVI. 421.

CRITICAL COMMENT

STORY (1833)

It is true that among the enumerated powers we do not find that of establishing a bank, or creating a corporation. But we do find there the great powers to levy and collect taxes: to borrow money to regulate commerce: to declare and conduct war and to raise and support armies and navies. Now, if a bank be a fit means to execute any or all of these powers, it is just as much implied, as any other means. . . . In the present times it can hardly require argument to prove that it is a convenient, a useful and an essential instrument in the fiscal operations of the government of the United States. This is so

generally admitted by sound and intelligent statesmen that it would be a waste of time to endeavour to establish the truth by an elaborate survey of the mode in which it touches the administration of all the various branches of the powers of the Government.

448.

JOSEPH STORY, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States.

HARE (1889)

The case of McCulloch v. The State of Maryland is entirely consonant with the course of judicial decision, and so much in harmony with that of legislature that if the doctrine which it established were overthrown a large and essential part of the legislation of Congress would fall with it. That the Bank of the United States was twice incorporated by men belonging to different parties, and viewing the Constitution in different aspects; that its constitutionality was never assailed successfully, and was sustained on the only occasion when the question was brought into court; that it finally fell, not in consequence of a denial of the implied power of Congress to incorporate a bank, . . . but because the president thought that some of the details of the bill presented for his signature were objectionable and exceeded the limits of the executive power - would be enough to prove, if proof were needed, that the principles vindicated by Chief-Justice Marshall are deeply rooted in the Constitution, and cannot be disturbed without destroying its usefulness.

JOHN INNESS C. HARE, American Constitutional Law. I. 107.

WILLOUGHBY (1890)

The case of McCulloch v. Maryland arose from the attempt on the part of Maryland to prevent the operation, within her borders, of the federal institution, the Second United States Bank. This she endeavoured to do by taxing out of existence the branch bank which had been located on her territory.

WESTEL W. WILLOUGHBY, Supreme Court of the United States. 59.

W. G. SUMNER (1896)

February 11th, 1818, Maryland laid a stamp tax on notes of any bank doing business in the State and not by or with the