Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States

Chassaniol v. City of Greenwood

Chassaniol v. City of Greenwood, 291 U.S. 584 (1934)

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1934-03-12
Topic
general

Mr. Justice Brandeis delivered the opinion of the Court. The City of Greenwood, Mississippi, laid by ordinance, in 1931 and in 1932, a tax “ upon every person engaged in the business of buying or selling cotton for himself ”■ within the city. In each year a tax of $50 was assessed to Chassaniol. He paid.it under protest; and duly applied for refund to the City Council, claiming that the tax was illegal, and that the ordinances and the statutes authorizing it as construed and applied were void, because they violate the commerce clause of the Federal Constitution.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Chassaniol v. City of Greenwood. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Authority status
pending
Cited by
82 opinions

Headnotes

  1. Constitutional Law — Commerce Clause The business of buying and selling cotton that is locally produced, processed, and warehoused is local in character, and a local occupation tax imposed on the buyer does not contravene the Commerce Clause even though all the cotton so bought is ultimately shipped by the buyer in interstate or foreign commerce. 291 U.S. at 586
  2. Constitutional Law — Commerce Clause Ginning cotton, transporting it to a local market, and warehousing, buying, and compressing it there are steps in preparation for its sale and shipment in interstate or foreign commerce, but each step prior to the actual sale and shipment is a transaction local to the state and in intrastate commerce; persons engaged in performing such local functions may therefore be subjected to an occupation tax. 291 U.S. at 591
CHASSANIOLv. GREENWOOD,291 U.S. 584(1934)
54 S.Ct. 541
CHASSANIOLv. CITY OF GREENWOOD.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI.
No. 428.
Argued February 6, 1934.
Decided March 12, 1934.
The business of buying and selling cotton locally produced, processed and warehoused, is local in character; and a local occupation tax upon the buyer does not contravene the Commerce Clause, although the course of the business be such that all of the cotton so bought isPage 585ultimately shipped by the buyer in interstate or foreign commerce.Federal Compress Warehouse Co. v.McLean,ante, p. 17. P. 586.166 Miss. 848;148 So. 781, affirmed.
APPEAL from the affirmance of a judgment of a Circuit Court of
Mississippi, which sustained on appeal an order of the City
Council of Greenwood refusing a refund of taxes.
Mr. Edward W. Smith, with whomMessrs. Sam C. Cook,Marcellus Green, andGarner W. Greenwere on the brief, for appellant.Messrs. J.A. LauderdaleandA.H. Bell, with whomMr. J.A.Tysonwas on the brief, for appellee.
MR. JUSTICE BRANDEIS delivered the opinion of the Court.
The City of Greenwood, Mississippi, laid by ordinance, in 1931 and in 1932, a tax "upon every person engaged in the business of buying or selling cotton for himself" within the city. In each year a tax of $50 was assessed to Chassaniol. He paid it under protest; and duly applied for refund to the City Council, claiming that the tax was illegal, and that the ordinances and the statutes authorizing it as construed and applied were void, because they violate the commerce clause of the Federal Constitution. The City Council refused the refund. Its action in denying this claim under the Constitution was sustained by both the Circuit Court of Leflore County and by the Supreme Court of the State,166 Miss. 848;148 So. 781. Whether they erred in so holding is the only question presented for decision by this appeal.

Greenwood is a concentration point for long staple cotton and an active market for its purchase and sale. All of the cotton there dealt in is grown and ginned in Mississippi. It reaches the Greenwood warehouses, about 70 per cent. by rail, the rest by automobile, truck, or wagon. There, it is compressed substantially as described inFederal Compress Warehouse Co. v.McLean, ante, p. 17.Page 586Purchases and sales are made upon the market by transfer and delivery of receipts issued by the local warehouses under the United States Warehouse Act. The prices are governed largely by transactions on the cotton exchanges of New York, Chicago, New Orleans and Liverpool.

There are at Greenwood about 25 cotton buyers, each of whom, like Chassaniol, purchases and sells cotton for himself. The buyer becomes the absolute owner. He makes the profit or bears the loss. But when he buys he customarily has in hand and in mind orders or contracts for that particular grade, for immediate or future delivery in other states or countries to the extent of about 90 per cent., on the average, of all cotton purchased by him. The remaining 10 per cent., he buys because, as often happens, growers of cotton refuse to sell less than their whole lot; and the lot may include a quantity greater than, or some bales of a grade different from, that for which the buyer has orders or contracts. The surpluses so bought are called "overs." Sometimes the "over" is held by the buyer until he gets an order or contract on which it can be placed. Sometimes the "over" is sold to another buyer at Greenwood. And some of the cotton bought as an "over" changes ownership several times within the State. But eventually the "overs," like the rest of the cotton, are shipped in interstate or foreign commerce.

Chassaniol contends that all the cotton is in interstate or foreign commerce from the moment it leaves the gin for Greenwood, or at least from the moment it is purchased at Greenwood by the buyer. The argument is that already at that time the cotton is destined for ultimate shipment to some other state or country; and that to tax the occupation of the cotton buyer burdens interstate commerce, since the buyer at Greenwood is the instrumentality by which the interstate transaction is initiated. The business involved is substantially like that described inPage 587Federal Compress Co. v.McLean;and the rule there declared must govern here. Ginning cotton, transporting it to Greenwood, and warehousing, buying and compressing it there, are each, like the growing of it, steps in preparation for the sale and shipment in interstate or foreign commerce. But each step prior to the sale and shipment is a transaction local to Mississippi, a transaction in intrastate commerce. Hence those engaged in performing any such local function may be subjected to an occupation tax, just as the property used, or processed, by them may be subjected to a property tax.

There is nothing inDahnke-Walker Milling Co. v.Bondurant,257 U.S. 282or inLemkev.Farmers Grain Co.,258 U.S. 50, inconsistent with this conclusion. The regulations involved in those cases were found to impose a direct burden upon interstate commerce itself.Staffordv.Wallace,258 U.S. 495, is also in harmony with the rule here applied. SeeMinnesotav.Blasius,290 U.S. 1,7-8.Affirmed.