State v. Applegarth
Citations
- 81 Md. 293
- 28 L.R.A. 812
- 31 A. 961
- 1895 Md. LEXIS 53
Syllabus
<p>License Taxes — Constitutional Law — License Tax Lmposed on Oyster Packers — Title of Statute.</p> <p>The Legislature has the constitutional right to require the payment of a license fee for the privilege of carrying on a particular kind of business; and the question as to what occupations shall be licensed and what rates shall be charged, must generally be left to the discretion of the Legislature.</p> <p>The oyster beds of the Chesapeake Bay are the property of the State, and the Legislature has the power to pass laws determining when oysters can be taken, and to make all reasonable regulations concerning the same.</p> <p>Code, Art. 72, as amended by the Act of 1894, ch. 380, requires every person engaged in the business of packing or caftning oysters for sale or transportation to take out a license, paying therefor a sum graduated according to the quantity of oysters packed by the applir cant; the money so obtained to be placed to the credit of the Oyster Fund and used in maintaining a police force for the protection of oysters, etc. Held,</p> <p>1st. That the license fee so required is not a tax on property, but a license tax on business or occupation.</p> <p>2nd. That the provision requiring such license fees to be paid into the Oyster Fund is not open to objection, since, if the Legislature has the right to impose the tax, it can determine what shall be done with the money arising from it.</p> <p>3rd. That such tax is not a regulation of inter-state commerce within the Constitution of the United States, since no exemption can be claimed from a general tax on business, upon the ground that the products thereof may be used in commerce.</p> <p>The above mentioned Act of 1894, was entitled, An Act to repeal Art. 72 of the Code, title “Oysters,” and to re-enact the same with amendments; and it provided that persons engaged in the business of packing oysters should pay a license tax. Held, that the Act was not in violation of Constitution, Art. 3, sec. 29, as emb
Judges: Boyd
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.