◆ SpookStack

4a deer privilege freely granted by thefthese cases are the general Co tion.” The sect’s activi- - “The taxes imposed by this or-|in 1898. Every power of Taxation dinance,” the majority opinion con-|or regulation is capable of abuse. tinued, “can hardly help but be as|Zach one to some extent prohibits severe and telling in their tmpact/the free exercise of religion and on the freedom of the press and |Sbridges the freedom of the press religion as the ‘tates on know!l-jbut that is hardly a reason for edge’ at which the Firat Amend./denying the power. If the tax is ment was partly aimed. They may|Wsed oppressively, the law will indeed operate even more subtly. Protest the victims gf such ac erant evangelists moving 7 a ‘throughout a State or from State! Justice Prankfurter, in ito State would feel immediately | rate dissent, said that Chief Justice ‘the cumulative e uch or-/John Marshali’s famous dictum‘ idinances as they me fashion- that the power to tax is the power, ‘able, The way of the religious dis-|t0 destroy is true “only ‘in the 'menter has Jong been hard. ‘But|sense that those who have power if the formula of this type of /¢29 misuse it. Mr. Justice Holmes <7 ordinance is approved, a new de-| disposed of this smooth phrase os 4 ‘vice for the suppression of religious}® Constitutional basis for ae minorities will have been fouhd, |dating taxes when he wrote ‘the “The fact that the ordinance is/Power to tax is not the power to) .. ‘nondiscriminatory' ig immaterial.|@estroy while this court sits." ve The protection affored by thel- a First Amendment is not so re stricted. A license tax certainly does not acquire constitutional jralidity. because it classifies the \privileges protected by the First |Amendment along with the wares and merchandise of hyicksters and s and treats them alike, Such equality in treqtment does, not save the ordinanile. Freedom of press, freedom of h, free! dom of religion are in a preferred position. | “This tax is not a charge for the enjoyment of # privilege oF| benefit hestowed by the State. The; . privilege in question exists apart: ’ from State authority, It is guaran teed the people by the Fed: Constitution, , ‘ “Plainly a community may no suppress, or the State tax, the dis/ semination of views because they, gre unpopular, annoying or tasteful. If that device were ev: sanctioned, there would have been! forged a ready instr“nent for the! suppression of the faith which any minority cherishes but which does not happen to be in. favor. That would be a complete repudiation of the sophy of the Bill of Rights.” ri Justice , who wrote the ma- jority opinidh a year ago, took the position in Ris dissenting opinion yesterday that the sale of religious books cannot be classed az a re- gious exercise. Cover Many Businesses *“It is urged,” he said, “that such a tax as this may be used readily to restrict the dissemina- tion of Ideas, This must be con- ceded but Possibility of mis- use does not make a tax uncon- stitutional. fo abuse is claimed hare. The onfinances in some of|