User:Glenfarclas/Wiscart v. Dauchy

Wiscart v. Dauchy,, also called Jennings v. Brig Perseverance, was an early decision of the United States Supreme Court.

The Justices at the time, rather than issuing a single opinion of the Court, instead issued seriatim opinions, with each writing separately and reading their own analysis in turn. The Court's interpretation of the federal tax power lasted until modified in Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. (1895), in which the Supreme Court held an unapportioned 1894 federal income tax on interest, dividends and rents to be unconstitutional because the tax was a "direct tax" that had to be apportioned. The Pollock decision was overturned by the Sixteenth Amendment (1913), which allows the Congress to impose a tax on incomes from "whatever source derived" without any requirement for apportionment.

Wiscart held that all cases brought to the Supreme Court must be on writ of error, meaning that the court could review only questions of law, not fact. Wilson, J., dissented, arguing that under the Constitution the Supreme Court had appellate jurisdiction both as to law and fact. Because a statement of facts in equity and admiralty cases was required under the Judiciary Act, only writ of error was available, as appeal would have sent up all the evidence and a statement of facts would not be needed. In Jennings, Paterson admitted he preferred Wilson's more liberal interpretation, but considered himself bound by Wiscart. See, later, Blaine v. Ship Charles Carter, brought by appeal.