Your “view” as stated was: “There are only three types of Direct Tax that require apportionment under the Constitution. A capitation tax. A tax on wealth or the value of non-real property. A tax on the value of real property.”
While there was a unanimous opinion in Hylton that a federal tax on carriages for the conveyance of persons was upheld as being “indirect” and not requiring an apportionment [a conclusion I agree with], your opinion that “There are only three types of Direct Tax that require apportionment under the Constitution . . . etc.” was not the subject being decided by the court and was so emphasized in the opinion. So, in fact, the Hylton case does not confirm your “view”.
Also keep in mind Chief Justice ELLSWORTH who was sworn into office the morning of the Court’s decision in Hylton, did not take part in it. But his explanations, specifically with regard to the meaning of “direct taxes” captures the characteristics which separate and define direct taxes from those which are indirect.
”Direct taxation can go but little way towards raising a revenue. To raise money in this way, people must be provident; they must constantly be laying up money to answer the demands of the collector. But you cannot make people thus provident. If you would do any thing to the purpose, you must come in when they are spending, and take a part with them. This does not take away the tools of a man’s business, or the necessary utensils of his family: it only comes in when he is taking his pleasure, and feels generous; when he is laying out a shilling for superfluities, it takes twopence of it for public use, and the remainder will do him as much good as the whole.”
Ellsworth goes on to note:
“The experiments, which have been made in our own country, show the productive nature of indirect taxes. The imports into the United States amount to a very large sum. They never will be less, but will continue to increase for centuries to come. As the population of our country increases, the imports will necessarily increase. They will increase, because our citizens will choose to be farmers; living independently on their freeholds, rather than to be manufacturers, and work for a groat a day.”
”On the other hand, direct taxes are not voluntary, nor, in general, are they avoidable. And with respect to direct taxes, the anti-federalist minority of the Convention of Pennsylvania warned that direct taxation “…is a tax that, however oppressive in its nature, and unequal in its operation, is certain as to its produce and simple in its collection; it cannot be evaded like the objects of imposts or excise …” ___ See Connecticut ratification debates Elliot’s VOL II, page 191
So, a few characteristics of an indirect tax are, it is voluntarily paid during the taxpayer’s consumption, and safe because no man is obliged to consume more than he pleases, and such a tax are costs added by government to things which individuals are free to acquired or reject, while direct taxes are those which are assessed to the individual by government, are oppressive, and not avoidable.
Are we to pretend that the bread which working people earn by the sweat of their labor is not their property, and so protected by the rule of apportionment?
JWK
“The property which every man has in his own labor, as it is the original foundation of all other property, so it is the most sacred and inviolable. The patrimony of the poor man lies in the strength and dexterity of his own hands; and to hinder him from employing this strength and dexterity in what manner he thinks proper, without injury to his neighbor, is a plain violation of this most sacred property.” ___ Butchers’ Union Co. v. Crescent City Co., 111 U.S. 746 (1884)
