Manufactured tobacco shipped in bond from the manufactory and
stored in an export bonded warehouse on the 14th of June, 1872, was
subject to the tax of thirty-two cents per pound, prescribed by the
Internal Revenue Act of July 20, 1868. 15 Stat. 152.
This action was brought by Blackwell against Stockdale,
collector of internal revenue for the first collection district of
Louisiana, and, on his death revived against Jones, his
executrix.
Judgment having been rendered against her, she sued out this
writ of error.
The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the
Court.
MR. JUSTICE HARLAN delivered the opinion of the Court.
The tobacco described in the petition was shipped by Blackwell,
the plaintiff below, in bond, from the manufactory in Virginia to
the port of New Orleans, and was there entered in bond in an export
bonded warehouse on June 13, 1872. On the 1st of July next
thereafter he, by his agents, applied to the Collector of Internal
Revenue for the First Collection District
Page 100 U. S. 600
of Louisiana, including the City of New Orleans, to withdraw the
tobacco for sale or consumption, offering to pay a tax on the same
at the rate of twenty cents per pound, as prescribed in the act of
June 6, 1872. 17 Stat. 249. The collector refused to permit its
withdrawal unless a tax at the rate of thirty-two cents per pound
was first paid, as prescribed by the Act of July 20, 1868. 15
id. 152.
Upon the trial in the court below, the jury were instructed,
among other things, that, on and after July 1, 1872, and prior to
March 3, 1873, the only tax imposed by law upon manufactured
tobacco was twenty cents per pound. The principal question before
us is as to the correctness of that instruction.
By the first section of the Act of July 20, 1868, a tax of
thirty-two cents per pound was imposed upon all manufactured
tobacco. The same act provided for a system of export bonded
warehouses, to be designated and established by the Commissioner of
Internal Revenue, at any port of entry in the United States, "for
the storage of manufactured tobacco and snuff in bond intended for
exportation." Manufactured tobacco, after being removed in bond
from the manufactory to an export bonded warehouse, could, however,
be withdrawn, upon payment of tax, for sale or consumption.
Up to Nov. 21, 1871, on which day the Commissioner submitted his
annual report of the operations of the internal revenue system for
the fiscal year ended June 30, 1871, there had been established and
were in operation sixteen of such export bonded warehouses. They
were located in Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland,
Virginia, Louisiana, California, and Oregon. From the report of the
Commissioner, of which we may take judicial notice, it appears that
during that fiscal year 10,621,183 pounds were withdrawn for
exportation from the several export bonded warehouses, while the
quantity withdrawn from them for consumption during the same period
was 11,499,659 pounds -- showing that less than one-half of the
tobacco and snuff received in bond from the manufactory was
actually exported. The Commissioner stated that from the eight
bonded warehouses, established at the several ports of
Philadelphia, Baltimore, New Orleans, San Francisco, and Portland,
Oregon, in which were stored during the fiscal year
Page 100 U. S. 601
ended June 30, 1871, 9,437,257 pounds of manufactured tobacco,
only 437,495 pounds during that period were withdrawn for
exportation, while 8,480,656 pounds were withdrawn for consumption.
"The practical operation," said he,
"of this system of bonded warehouses hitherto has been to give
to a few individuals and firms, more particularly the proprietors
of the warehouses, the same facilities for storing tobacco,
without the prepayment of tax, as were given by the former
system of class B, bonded warehouses, abolished by the act of July
20, 1868."
He therefore recommended the abolition of the system of export
bonded warehouses, as required by the best interests both of the
government and of the manufacturer. The benefits to result from
such abolition were that
"a large portion of the expenses now [then] incurred by the
manufacturers in exporting their goods would be saved, the
government would receive the taxes on all goods
when removed
from the place of manufacture, all jobbers and dealers in
manufactured tobacco would be placed on the same footing with
regard to the traffic in tax-paid goods, and the special privileges
and advantages enjoyed by a few individuals and firms would be
removed."
It was doubtless because of these official recommendations from
the head of the internal revenue system that Congress made the
numerous amendments of the act of July 20, 1868, which appear in
the Act of June 6, 1872.
The contention of the defendant in error is that while all
manufactured tobacco stored in export bonded warehouses and
withdrawn for sale or consumption
before the first day of
July, 1872, was subject to the tax prescribed by the act of July
20, 1868, all found stored in such warehouses on the 1st of July,
1872, without regard to the date of its deposit therein in bond,
was subject, upon withdrawal on and after that date, for sale or
consumption, to the reduced tax prescribed by the act of June 6,
1872. To this construction of the statute we cannot yield our
assent.
It is true that the Act of June 6, 1872, which took effect on
the 1st of August, 1872, "except where otherwise provided,"
declares "that on and after the first day of July next" -- that is,
July 1, 1872 -- there shall be assessed and collected on
manufactured tobacco a tax of twenty cents per pound. But the
section
Page 100 U. S. 602
(sec. 31) which so declares must be interpreted in connection
with other provisions of the act, and with reference to the reasons
which caused the radical changes made by that act in the internal
revenue system as previously established. We have already seen that
the attention of Congress was called to the evils which had grown
up under the system of export bonded warehouses, and to the
necessity of its abolition. The Act of June 6, 1872, gave effect to
the recommendations of the Commissioner, and made such provisions
as would enable him to dispense with such warehouses altogether.
But a specific provision was made as to tobacco which had been
previously placed in export bonded warehouses under the act of June
20, 1868. It was declared,
"All tobacco and snuff now stored in any export bonded warehouse
shall, on and after July 1, 1872, be subject to the same tax as is
provided by this act, and shall, within six months after the
passage of this act, be withdrawn from such warehouse upon payment
of the tax, or for export, under the regulations of the
Commissioner of Internal Revenue now in force concerning
withdrawals of tobacco or snuff from bonded warehouses. And any
tobacco or snuff remaining in any export bonded warehouse for a
period of more than six months after the passage of this act shall
be forfeited to the United States, and shall be sold or disposed of
for the benefit of the same in such manner as shall be prescribed
by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, under the direction of the
Secretary of the Treasury."
We entertain no doubt as to the object of this provision. It
evidently refers only to tobacco stored in export bonded warehouses
at the date of the passage of the act, and not, also, as
claimed by the defendant in error, to that stored in such
warehouses after that date, and before the 1st of July, 1872. If
Congress intended that all manufactured tobacco, whether at the
manufactory or in an export bonded warehouse, should, on the 1st of
July, 1872, have the benefit of the reduced tax of twenty cents,
there would have been no necessity for a special declaration that
tobacco "now" -- that is, at the passage of the act -- stored in
export bonded warehouses should, on and after July 1, 1872, be
subject to the tax prescribed by the act of June 6, 1872. The
necessity for such declaration lay in the fact that unless tobacco,
deposited in export bonded warehouses
Page 100 U. S. 603
prior to that act, was, in express terms, given the benefit of
the reduced tax, it would be liable to the tax of thirty-two cents
imposed by the Act of July 20, 1868. This will become perfectly
clear when attention is given to the regulations which the
Commissioner of Internal Revenue had prescribed, and which were
then in force, in reference to the shipment of tobacco in bond from
the manufactory to an export bonded warehouse. Before any shipment
could take place, it was necessary that an inspector should
inspect, weigh, and mark each package of tobacco proposed to be
shipped to an export bonded warehouse. His report of inspection
indicated the marks and numbers of each package, the number of
packages and their contents, the number of pounds,
the
rate and
amount of tax. All these items were carried
into the transportation bond which the shipper was required to
execute. They appeared also in the report of inspection when the
tobacco reached its destination; and finally, when the tobacco was
received by the storekeeper at the export bonded warehouse, the
shipper was required to execute bond, with surety, binding him to
pay "the amount of taxes due and owing" on the tobacco, the rate
and amount of tax due thereon being described
on the face of
the bond, and being the same as that shown in the certificate
of the inspector. So that as to all tobacco in export bonded
warehouses on 6th June, 1872, the government then held bonds
obligating the parties thereto to pay the tax, as to rate and
amount, which appeared on all the official documents connected with
the transportation from the manufactory to the bonded warehouse.
Hence the specific provision giving the owners of tobacco, stored
in export bonded warehouses on 6th June, 1872, the benefit, on and
after the 1st of July, 1872, of the reduced tax, as well as the
privilege of keeping it there for six months without removal or
payment of tax.
But when Congress declared that tobacco stored in such
warehouses, at the date of the passage of the act of June 6, 1872,
should be subject to the tax provided by that act, it does not at
all follow that tobacco stored in export bonded warehouses after
the passage of that act, and before July 1, 1872, when the reduced
tax took effect, was entitled to the benefit of the reduction. Such
a construction of the act would be
Page 100 U. S. 604
inconsistent with the policy which dictated the abolition of the
system of export warehouses, as well as with the necessary
implications arising from the specific provision as to tobacco
stored in such warehouses at the date of the act. It deprives the
word "now" in the clause we have quoted of all meaning. If the
tobacco in question had remained in the manufactory until July 1,
1872, it would have been subject to a tax of only twenty cents; but
it could not on that day, and under the Act of June 6, 1872, have
been removed therefrom for sale or consumption except upon payment
of the tax. If, however, Blackwell chose not to wait until that
date, when the reduction would take effect as to all tobacco in the
manufactory, but preferred to ship it in bond to an export bonded
warehouse, between June 6, 1872, and July 1, 1872, he must abide by
the terms of the bond given at the time his tobacco was deposited
in such warehouse. His bond, upon its face, recites -- if the
statute was complied with -- the rate and amount of tax prescribed
by the law in force when the bond was executed. He could not
satisfy its terms except by paying the amount it called for. That
Congress gave the owners of tobacco stored in bonded warehouses on
6th June, 1872, the benefit of the reduced tax constitutes no
reason why such reduction should be applied to tobacco stored in
such warehouses after that date, when the owner had, prior to July
1, 1872, given bond covering the tax due under the then existing
law. If the Act of June 6, 1872, had prescribed an increase of tax
to take effect on the first day of July thereafter, no one would
contend that such increase would have applied to tobacco stored in
an export bonded warehouse between June 6, 1872, and July 1, 1872.
That Congress reduced, rather than increased, the tax, to be
assessed and collected on and after July 1, 1872, does not
authorize the court to relieve Blackwell from the obligations of
his bond, given prior to that date, to pay the tax as ascertained
and fixed by the law in force when it was executed, especially
since the Act of June 6, 1872, did not go into effect before July
1, 1872, as to the reduced tax, except as to tobacco stored in
export bonded warehouses on 6th June, 1872.
It results from what has been said that the collector
rightly
Page 100 U. S. 605
demanded a payment of thirty-two cents per pound on Blackwell's
tobacco when, on July 1, 1872, he applied to withdraw it for sale
or consumption.
Nor was the collector responsible for any damage to the tobacco
resulting from the delay in obtaining the necessary stamps after
Blackwell's demand in August, 1872. The collector was then, it is
true, without the necessary stamps, but he made requisition for
them upon the proper authorities at Washington. In view of the
refusal of the appellee to pay the tax upon the first application
for withdrawal on 1st July, 1872, the collector was justified in
believing that appellee would not pay the required tax, and he was
therefore under no obligation to keep stamps constantly in
readiness for him.
We perceive in the evidence no just ground upon which to rest a
verdict against the plaintiff in error. The jury should have been
instructed to find in her favor.
The judgment will be reversed with directions for further
proceedings in conformity with this opinion, and it is
So ordered.