hence the organization of the system of the United States was based upon, and grew out of, the requirements of the law. I do not deem this a misfortune. The public anxiety in regard to the construction of the law induced a large amount of correspondence with persons in various parts of the country, and in the month of October the letters sent numbered occasionally eight hundred per day. Many of these letters were formal, and others were repetitions of those previously given; but each day compelled attention to a large number of new questions.
The practice of the office in the construction of the law was controlled by a few leading principles.
First: to levy a tax in those cases only which were clearly provided for by the statute and, consequently, whenever a reasonable doubt existed, the decision was against the Government and in favor of the contestant.
Second: In deciding whether an article was or was not a manufacture, it was the practice to ascertain how it was regarded by business men at the time the excise law was passed; in all cases abstaining from inquiry as to the mode of preparation, or the nature or extent of the change produced. If the article in question was regarded by the makers and by business men as an article of commerce, and it was produced by hand or machinery, it was the practice to treat it as a manufacture under the law, unless specially exempt.
Third: Upon articles manufactured and removed for consumption by the manufacturer, the tax was assessed precisely as it would have been assessed if the articles had been removed for sale.
Fourth: In considering the law relating to the use of stamps, it was the rule of the office to give that signification to the names used in the statute descriptive of various instruments subject to stamp tax, which was ordinarily given to
