§ 454. “Imports or Exports.”
It was suggested at the Convention (Deb., Melb., p. 647), on the authority of Brown v. Houston, 114 U.S. 622, and Woodruff v. Parham, 8 Wall. 123, that these words did not apply to goods carried from one State to another, but only to goods imported from or exported to foreign countries. On the other hand in Brown v. Maryland, 12 Wheat. 419, Marshall, C.J., in deciding that a charge imposed by the State of Maryland on foreign imports was unconstitutional both as a duty on imports and as a regulation of commerce, said:—“It may be proper to add that we suppose the principles laid down in this case to apply equally to importations from a sister State.” And in Leisy v. Hardin, 135 U.S. 100, Fuller, C.J., quoting these words, said: “Manifestly this must be so, for the same public policy applied to commerce among the States as to foreign commerce, and not a reason could be assigned for confiding the power over the one which did not conduce to establish the propriety of confiding the power over the other.”
In this Constitution the words imports and exports are uniformly used of foreign imports and exports only, and the words “goods passing into or out of the State” are used with reference to inter-state trade. (See secs. 92, 93, 95.)