PRINCIPLES OF TAXATION. 811 



individual rights, without which the social compact could not exist, 

 and which are respected by all free governments entitled to the name. 

 Among these is the limitation of the right of taxation " (Loan Asso- 

 ciation vs. Topeka, 20 Wallace, 658). 



In connection with this general subject, the opinion expressed by 

 Chief-Justice Marshall is also historically worthy of notice. It had 

 its origin in the case of Baron vs. The Mayor of Baltimore, in which 

 the city of Baltimore, in the exercise of its corporate authority over 

 the harbor, etc., so diverted certain streams of water that they made 

 deposits of sand and gravel near the plaintiff's wharf, and thereby 

 prevented the access of vessels to it. A writ of error was taken from 

 the judgment of the Maryland Court of Appeals, refusing damages, 

 to the Supreme Court of the United States, on the ground that this 

 decision was in violation of the fifth amendment to the Constitu- 

 tion of the United States, which prohibits the taking of public prop- 

 ery for private use without just compensation; the plaintiff con- 

 tending further, " that this amendment, being in favor of the liberty 

 of the citizens, ought to be so construed as to restrain the legislative 

 power of a State, as well as that of the United States." The court, 

 however, by Chief-Justice Marshall, held that this amendment of 

 the Constitution " is intended solely as a limitation on the exercise 

 of power by the Government of the United States, and is not ap- 

 plicable to the legislation of the States" '; which was equivalent to 

 saying, viz., that if the several States choose to arbitrarily take or 

 confiscate the property of any of its citizens, there was no higher 

 sovereignty to restrain them. 



At the close of the late civil war, however, when it was deemed 

 desirable by Congress to impose some restrictions on the recon- 

 structed States, so as to prevent the former disloyal element of their 

 population, in the event of the contingency of regaining legislative 

 power, from dealing arbitrarily or unjustly with any class of their 

 fellow-citizens who might happen to be obnoxious, the following 

 clause was made a part of the fourteenth amendment, and through 

 its adoption has become the supreme law of the land : " Nor shall 

 any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without 

 due process of law." 



Now, the force of this amendment obviously depends upon the 

 meaning of the last clause, " due process of law "; and it is also clear 

 that " due process of law " does not mean a procedure in conform- 

 ity with any law which a State legislature might enact, or with any 

 provision which the people of a State might put in their Constitu- 

 tion; for if such be the interpretation of this phrase, then this 

 clause of the fourteenth amendment referred to would practically 

 read as follows: "Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, 



