▁" we ▁suppose ▁the ▁principles ▁laid ▁down ▁in ▁this ▁case , ▁to ▁apply ▁equally ▁to ▁import ations ▁from ▁a ▁sister ▁State ." ▁In ▁ 1 8 6 0 , ▁Chief ▁Justice ▁Tan ey , ▁wrote ▁the ▁Supreme ▁Court ' s ▁opinion ▁in ▁Al my ▁v . ▁California , ▁which ▁found ▁a ▁tax ▁on ▁a ▁bill ▁of ▁l ading ▁for ▁gold ▁dust ▁export ed ▁from ▁California ▁to ▁New ▁York ▁viol ated ▁the ▁Import ▁Ex port ▁Cla use . ▁" We ▁think ▁this ▁case ▁cannot ▁be ▁distinguished ▁from ▁that ▁of ▁Brown ▁v . ▁Maryland ," ▁he ▁wrote , ▁con cluding ▁that ▁" the ▁state ▁tax ▁in ▁question ▁is ▁a ▁duty ▁upon ▁the ▁export ▁of ▁gold ▁and ▁silver , ▁and ▁consequ ently ▁rep ug nant ▁to ▁the ▁[ Import - Export ▁Cla use ] ." ▁In ▁ 1 8 6 9 , ▁however , ▁the ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁determined ▁that ▁the ▁Import - Export ▁Cla use ▁applied ▁only ▁to ▁foreign ▁trade ▁and ▁not ▁trade ▁between ▁the ▁states . ▁ ▁In ▁Low ▁v . ▁Austin , ▁ 8 0 ▁U . S . ▁ 2 9 ▁( 1 8 7 2 ), ▁the ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁was ▁given ▁the ▁question ▁of ▁" wh ether ▁imported ▁mer ch and ise , ▁upon ▁which ▁the ▁duties ▁and ▁charges ▁at ▁the ▁custom - house ▁have ▁been ▁paid , ▁is ▁subject ▁to ▁State ▁tax ation , ▁whilst ▁remaining ▁in ▁the ▁original ▁cases , ▁un bro ken ▁and ▁uns old , ▁in ▁the ▁hands ▁of ▁the ▁im porter ." ▁The ▁court , ▁drawing ▁on