6 OLEOMARGARINE. 



may, in its discretion, single out one thing and tax it and leave another 

 un taxed; but wherever you levy a tax it must be levied uniformly on 

 the same class of articles. The courts insist upon uniformity, but 

 they never question the discretionary power lodged with the legisla- 

 tive body to impose the tax. 



Senator ALLEN. I know of but one precedent for this proposed legis- 

 lation, and that is the taxation of State bank issues. 



Mr. GROUT. Exactly. That is a notable instance, the rankest 

 instance probably, our opponents would say, that has ever been fur- 

 nished of the exercise of the power to tax out of existence. 



Mr. HOARD. In addition to the State bank tax, there is the tax on 

 filled cheese and adulterated flour. 



Mr. GROUT. Yes, to be sure, and along the same line of this pro- 

 ceeding. The power to tax and tax out of existence is unquestioned, 

 as I believe, gentlemen. The only question which the court ever 

 inquires into is whether the tax is laid evenly, uniformly, upon the 

 class of articles which it proposes to deal with. It may select a single 

 thing and tax it and leave another thing untaxed. That is according 

 to the discretion of the legislative power. The cure for any wrong in 

 this respect is with the constituency. If an unjust tax be imposed, the 

 people will send men here who will exercise better discretion. 



Senator ALLEN. The court can not inquire into the motive of the 

 legislative department; but if that motive is apparent upon the face of 

 the act, then it does enter into the litigation and become a part of the 

 construction of the act. 



Mr. GROUT. Yes; but they do not, then, even give it effect to the 

 extent of setting aside the power of the legislature to tax. How could 

 it have been otherwise than that the intent was apparent in the law 

 taxing State banks? 



Senator ALLEN. Suppose it is apparent on the face of this bill that 

 the motive for imposing the tax is to destroy the thing taxed ? 



Mr. GROUT. We deny this. We say that is not the motive. 



Senator ALLEN. What would be the rule, then ? 



Mr. GROUT. I do not think it would change it a particle. Judge 

 Collamer, up in our State, who was a Senator with you gentlemen, and 

 held a high place when in this body the very first in his time, as tradi- 

 tion will tell you, and as discussions will disclose if you turn to them 

 Judge Collamer, on the bench up in Vermont, said you could not inquire 

 into the motive by which one did a legal act; and that I understand to 

 be good law everywhere. 



Senator ALLEN. That is true; but suppose the motive is apparent 

 upon the act itself? 



Mr. GROUT. Very well; the motive makes no difference, providing 

 the act be legal, and here unquestionably the act is legal. 



Senator ALLEN. Then you must take into consideration the motive, 

 because it is a part of the act? 



Mr. GROUT. Well, I have expressed to the committee my views on 

 this subject, but let me say it is not the purpose here to tax out of 

 existence. The object of this second section is to prevent the sale of 

 oleomargarine as butter, to prevent a fraud. And we say that is the 

 only rational construction which can be given, because if the purpose 

 of the section was to destroy the article it would not provide as it does 

 in the closing clause for a small tax, the least possible tax, on the 



