209 U.S. Opinion of the Court. States," and rights secured by the Fourteenth Amendment, "which provides that no State shall abridge the privileges or immunities of c. itizeus of the United States, nor deprive any pemon of life, liberty or property without due process of law, nor deny to any pemon within its jurisdiction the equal pro- tection of the laws." Mr. J. B. Thompson, with whom' Mr. Phil B. Thompson, Junior, was on the brief, for plaintiff in error. Mr. John W. Ray, with whom Mr. N. B. Hays was on the brief, for defendant in error. Ms. JVST?CE MCKEN?;A, after making the foregoing state- ment, delivered the opinion of the court. The Court of Appeals of Kentucky opened its opinion in this case by saying that the whole question presented was whether the statute of the State, "imposing a tax on distilled spirits in bonded warehouses," violated the Federal Constitu- tion, and particularly the Fourteenth Amendment thereof. It wa? also said that the validity of the statutes under the con- stitution of the State had been construed and decided in Com- monwealth v. E. H. Taylor, Jr., Co., 101 Kentucky, 325; monwealth v. Walker, 25 Ky. Law Rep. 2122; Commonwealth v. Rosenfield Bros., 118 Kentucky, 374. And the court quoted from appellant's brief (plaintiff in error here) as follows: "It is not necessary on this appeal that the court shall either overrule, modify or change in any manner its opinion rendered in the case of Commonwealth v. Rosen field. In ac- cordance with the previous opinion of the court in the case of Commonwealth v. E. 'H. Taylor, Jr., 101 Kentucky, 325, it was held in the Rosenfield case that the law which imposed the tax and interest--the matter in controversy in this action --is not in conflict with the constitution of the State of Ken- tucky. It has never been held that this law is not in conflict
�
