MOLINA v.

RAFFERTY
No. 11988, Apr. 4, 1918
Jacinto Molina, plaintiff and appellee, v. James J. Rafferty,
Collector of Internal Revenue, defendant and appellant
TOPIC AS PER OUTLINE
Statutory construction > Definition, concept, and purpose
FACTS AND ISSUE
Act No. 2339, section 41 provides that:
In computing the tax above imposed transactions in the
following commodities shall be excluded: [] (c)
Agricultural products when sold by the producer or owner
of the land where grown, whether in their original state or
not.
Molina contends that the fishes he produced as were those upon
which the tax in question was levied are agricultural products
(not merely WON fish in general constitute an agricultural product).
SC: Yes, said fishes are considered agricultural products.
RATIO DECIDENDI
The decision cites Judge Cooley who said, The underlying
principle of all construction is that the intent of the legislature
should be sought in the words employed to express it, and
that when found it should be made to govern.
DISCUSSION
Assumption: By exempting agricultural products from this tax, the
farming industry would be favored and the development of the
countrys resources would be encouraged.
Inference: The objective was to levy the merchants tax upon
those who are engaged in profiting from goods produced by
others, but to exempt from the tax all persons directly
producing goods from the land.
On the term agricultural products
To accomplish the objective, instead of making a list of all
exempted products, the Legislature has grouped them all under
the term agricultural products.
If the artificial fish production is not to be included in the
exemption, this must be based upon the inadequacy of the
language used, rather than the assumption that the intention was

to exclude artificial fish producers from the benefits conferred upon

the producers of other substances.
The term agricultural products includes everything grown
upon the land, which serves to satisfy human needs, be it plants
or animals. Enclosing a given area of land and flooding it with
water to grow aquatic plants that will be fed upon by fish is just as
much an agricultural process as allowing poultry to feed upon
plants; hence, fish are just as truly a product of the land as are
poultry or swine.

DISSENT BY JUSTICE MALCOLM

This case is an illustration on how judges arrive at opposing
conclusions given the same set of facts, laws and authorities.
Decision on
Reconsideration

Original Decision

FACTS

Fish food are of

various kinds (some
float on water, others
are rooted, others are
loosely attached to the
ground)

Fish food consists of

marine plants which
grow from roots
attached to the bottom
of the pond

PURPOSE OF
THE LAW

If Legislature intended
to exempt all classes
of domestic products
(including fish), it
would have done so in
plain language

To encourage
commercial
development

Georgia SC: yield of the soil

Alabama, Wisconsin SC: live stock
AUTHORITIES
ON THE
TERM AGRI
PRODUCTS

Pennsylvania SC: domestic animals and

products of the farm
Philippine SC: frogs, foxes, bees, pigeons,
silkworms, silk, honey, fish
(This decision cited countries wherein there are
farms devoted to the production of said items)