Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Barney, Collector, v. Watson Et Al.

• 1875 • 92 U.S. 449 • Waite Court
In the case of Barney, Collector v. Watson et al., the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a tax imposed by the United States on distilled spirits was constitutional. The tax was imposed by the United States in 1868 and was challenged by Watson et al., who argued that the tax was unconstitutional because it was a direct tax and not apportioned among the states according to population. The Supreme Court held that the tax was constitutional because it was an indirect...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Waite Court
Term: 1875
Docket: 207
92 U.S. 449
23 L. Ed. 730
1875 U.S. LEXIS 1779
Argued: Apr 11, 1876

Barney, Collector, v. Watson Et Al.

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Barney, Collector v. Watson et al., the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a tax imposed by the United States on distilled spirits was constitutional. The tax was imposed by the United States in 1868 and was challenged by Watson et al., who argued that the tax was unconstitutional because it was a direct tax and not apportioned among the states according to population. The Supreme Court held that the tax was constitutional because it was an indirect tax, not a direct tax. The Court reasoned that the tax was imposed on the production of distilled spirits, not on the people themselves, and therefore it was not a direct tax. The Court also held that the tax was not unconstitutional because it was not apportioned among the states according to population. The Court's decision in this case established that the United States could impose taxes on the production of goods, even if those taxes were not apportioned among the states according to population. This decision has been cited in numerous subsequent cases involving the constitutionality of taxes imposed by the United States.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Barney, Collector v. Watson et al., Justice Field delivered a dissenting opinion in which he argued that Congress had no authority to pass an act allowing for the collection of taxes on distilled spirits produced before March 1, 1868. He maintained that such taxation was unconstitutional because it violated Article I Section 9 Clause 4 of the Constitution, which states that "No Capitation or other direct Tax shall be laid unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken." Furthermore, Justice Field argued that even if Congress did have this power under certain circumstances, they could not impose a tax retroactively and without notice as doing so would violate due process rights guaranteed by Amendment V. In conclusion, Justice Field believed that since there was no constitutional basis for imposing such a tax upon these individuals and businesses who had already paid their taxes prior to March 1st 1868 - it should not stand.

Opinion written by Justice JPBradley
Decided: May 08, 1876
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms