The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation
Chapter 138 : [27] Martin _v._ Hunter's Lessee, 1 Wheat. 304, 335 (1816).[28] 93 U.S. 130 (1876

[27] Martin _v._ Hunter's Lessee, 1 Wheat. 304, 335 (1816).

[28] 93 U.S. 130 (1876).

[29] Martin _v._ Hunter's Lessee, 1 Wheat. 304, 335 (1816).

[30] 93 U.S. 130, 137 (1876).

[31] Mondou _v._ New York, N.H. & H.R. Co., 223 U.S. 1, 57 (1912).

[32] 330 U.S. 386 (1947).

[33] Ibid. 393.

[34] Ableman _v._ Booth, 21 How. 506, 523 (1859), followed in United States _v._ Tarble, 13 Wall. 397 (1872).

[35] Tennessee _v._ Davis, 100 U.S. 257 (1880); _see also_ Maryland _v._ Soper, 270 U.S. 36 (1926).

[36] 135 U.S. 1 (1890).

[37] Keith _v._ Clark, 97 U.S. 454, 461 (1878).

[38] White _v._ Cannon, 6 Wall. 443, 450 (1868). _See also_ Hickman _v._ Jones, 9 Wall. 197 (1870); Dewing _v._ Perdicaries, 96 U.S. 193, 195 (1878).

[39] Ford _v._ Surget, 97 U.S. 594, 604 (1878); United States _v._ Keehler, 9 Wall. 83, 86 (1870).

[40] Texas _v._ White, 7 Wall. 700, 726 (1869).

[41] Ibid. 733. _See also_ Horn _v._ Lockhart, 17 Wall. 570, 580 (1873); Thomas _v._ Richmond, 12 Wall. 349, 357 (1871); White _v._ Hart, 13 Wall. 646 (1872); United States _v._ Home Ins. Co., 22 Wall. 99 (1875); Taylor _v._ Thomas, 22 Wall. 479 (1875); and Huntington _v._ Texas, 16 Wall. 402 (1873).

[42] 9 Wheat. 788 (1924).

[43] Ibid. 865.

[44] Ibid.

[45] Ibid. 866.

[46] Ibid. 867.

[47] 2 Pet. 449 (1829), followed in New York ex rel. Bank of Commerce _v._ Comrs. of Taxes and a.s.sessments, 2 Bl. 620 (1863).

[48] 12 Stat. 710 (1863).

[49] 31 U.S.C. -- 742 (1946).

[50] 7 Wall. 26 (1869).

[51] Hibernia Sav. & L. Soc. _v._ San Francisco, 200 U.S. 310, 315 (1906).

[52] Smith _v._ Davis, 323 U.S. 111 (1944).

[53] Plummer _v._ Coler, 178 U.S. 115 (1900); Blodgett _v._ Silberman, 277 U.S. 1, 12 (1928).

[54] Northwestern Mutual L. Ins. Co. _v._ Wisconsin, 275 U.S. 136, 140 (1927).

[55] Miller _v._ Milwaukee, 272 U.S. 713 (1927).

[56] Provident Inst. for Savings _v._ Ma.s.sachusetts, 6 Wall. 611 (1868); Society for Savings _v._ Coite, 6 Wall. 594 (1868); Hamilton Mfg. Co.

_v._ Ma.s.sachusetts, 6 Wall. 632 (1868); Home Ins. Co. _v._ New York, 134 U.S. 594 (1890).

[57] Macallen _v._ Ma.s.sachusetts, 279 U.S. 620, 625 (1929).

[58] Northwestern Mutual L. Ins. Co. _v._ Wisconsin, 275 U.S. 136 (1927).

[59] 9 Wheat. 738 (1824).

[60] Ibid. 867.

[61] 302 U.S. 134 (1937).

[62] Alward _v._ Johnson, 282 U.S. 509 (1931).

[63] Trinityfarm Const. Co. _v._ Grosjean, 291 U.S. 466 (1934).

[64] Atkinson _v._ Tax Commission, 303 U.S. 20 (1938).

[65] Superior Bath House Co. _v._ McCarroll, 312 U.S. 176 (1941).

[66] Buckstaff Bath House _v._ McKinley, 308 U.S. 358 (1939).

[67] Collins _v._ Yosemite Park & Curry Co., 304 U.S. 518 (1938).

[68] Alabama _v._ King & Boozer, 314 U.S. 1 (1941), overruling Panhandle Oil Co. _v._ Knox, 277 U.S. 218 (1928) and Graves _v._ Texas Co., 298 U.S. 393 (1936). _See also_ Curry _v._ United States, 314 U.S. 14 (1941).

[69] Wilson _v._ Cook, 327 U.S. 474 (1946).

[70] 306 U.S. 466 (1939), followed in State Tax Comm'n. _v._ Van Cott, 306 U.S. 511 (1939). This case overruled by implication Dobbins _v._ Erie County, 16 Pet. 435 (1842) and New York ex rel. Rogers _v._ Graves, 299 U.S. 401 (1937), which held the income of federal employees to be immune from State taxation.

[71] 306 U.S. 466, 487 (1939).

[72] Ibid. 492.

[73] 4 Wheat. 316, 426 (1819).

[74] Thompson _v._ Union P.R. Co., 9 Wall. 579, 588 (1870); Railroad Co.

_v._ p.e.n.i.ston, 18 Wall. 5, 31 (1873).

[75] Susquehanna Power Co. _v._ State Tax Comm'n., 283 U.S. 291 (1931).