of Maryland, which is taxed twenty cents upon
every hundred dollars for the school fund, and
which has been in operation for forty years, du-
ring which time all holders of this stock have
contributed, because the banks are obliged to pay
over this tax to the school fund, out of the profits,
before any dividend is made to the stock holders.
Should the Legislature attempt to tax the real
estate of her citizens beyond the limits of the
State, and that should fail, he did not see with
what propriety it could be attempted to tax per-
sonal property out of the Slate. In his opinion,
the same principle should govern whether as to
real or personal estate.
Mr. TUCK said, he desired to offer an amendment
of which he had given notice on a former day,
and which, as modified, read as follows:
Article 13th. "That taxes for the support of
government, and fines, duties and taxes, with a
political view for the good government and ben-
efit of the community, may be imposed or laid on
property within this State, and the legislature
ought to declare the objects for laying or impos-
ing the same."
Mr. TUCK would state briefly his reasons for
offering the amendment.
He desired to leave the power to the legisla-
ture with as few restrictions as possible Intimes
of difficulty and financial embarrassment, it is
easy to find means to avoid the restrictions; and
thus the spirit of the bill of rights, might be vio-
lated without any redress to the tax payer.
The opinion is entertained by many persons,
that this had been done by some of the tax laws
passed since 1840, It is very well known that
all these laws were passed for the purpose of
raising revenue for the support of government—
that is, for the purpose contemplated by the first
clause of the thirteenth article of the present
bill of rights. The taxes were designed "for the
support of government," and not "with political
view;" yet, they were not assessed according to
each man's "worth in real and personal proper-
ty, within this State," as required by that article.
He alluded to the tax on collateral inheritances;
the tax on the commissions of executors and
administrators—the tax on the public offices—
the stamp tax, &c.
He did not mean to say that these taxes were
wrong in themselves. All he meant to say, was,
that they were laid to raise revenue for the sup-
port of government; that that was the design and
no other. And in that view he thought the leg-
islature had done wrong in not declaring the ob-
jects for which these bills were past.
He admitted that the legislature should have
the power to lew taxes "with political view."
The peace and welfare of society required this.
The license system, lottery taxes, auction du-
ties and such other taxes were referable to this
power. These required regulation.
But no such necessity existed when the bills to
which he had referred were passed. It was not
pretended that collateral inheritances, commis-
sions, promissory notes, &c., needed regulation.
The Treasury needed the revenue, and thus the
latter clause of the thirteenth article was involv-

ed in aid of the purpose contemplated by the first
clause.
His amendment required that the laws should
state the object for which the taxes were laid—
whether to raise revenue for the support of gov-
ernment or with political view, so that the tax
payer might have the validity of the tax tried by
the courts. This could not be done under the
present laws, because the acts do not disclose the
object for which the taxes are laid, and being
within the provision of the latter clause of the
thirteenth article, though passed for a different
purpose, the courts can do no otherwise than say
that they are constitutional. The power of Con-
gress to pass tariff laws for the protection of do-
mestic labor has been, and is now denied by a
large party in the country. But this power can
never be tested in the United States courts, so
long as the laws profess to be mere revenue laws.
The power to raise revenue being conceded, the
courts are bound to declare all such laws to be
constitutional, unless they are in terms against
that instrument. The courts cannot go behind
the laws, and decide according to what may be
the motive of the legislature in passing them.
Mr. T. said that his amendment would allow
these questions to be settled by the judicial tri-
bunals, by shewing to the court the object and
purpose of the law—and if these were not war-
ranted by the Bill of Rights the act would be de-
clared void. He had no disposition lo disturb
the present tax system. That system will remain
until repealed by law. But cases under that
system had been carried to the Court of Appeals.
This showed doubt and dissatisfaction. And
when this is likely to occur by the exercise of
uncertain powers, the people should have an op-
portunity of testing the question. Nothing is
more unwelcome to the people than heavy taxes.
But they will submit when they are satisfied that
a necessity exists, and that the power to impose
the burden is vested in the Legislature. He had
said that he would confide this power to the Le-
gislature without restriction. But if we are to
say any thing on the subject in the Bill of Rights
he would prefer plain and definite language, not
only to indicate to the Legislature the limits of
their powers, but to allow the tax-payer to have
his case properly tried, if complaint were made.
He had also inserted the words "in this State,"
so as to prevent the Legislature from taxing pro-
perty beyond the State. He never could under-
stand by what authority the Legislature taxed
Bank and other Stocks, beyond the State, for the
support of our Government, when the thirteenth
article of the Bill of Rights declares that "every
man shall contribute according to his actual
worth in real and personal property within the
State." The Stocks of foreign Banks are not
within this State. The gentlemen from Freder-
ick and from Anne Arundel had made arguments
on this point which have not been and cannot be
answered. The true doctrine is taxation accord-
ing to protection. Why does a man pay taxes
on his property? On what theory is this requi-
red ? Only because justice suggests that his pro-
perty shall pay according to the protection it re-
ceives. He would not multiply words on this