Outside Of The Documentary Tax Periods, So What "Revenue Law" Is Being Referred To?

Presumably something specific to tobacco products?

Noting the date of Feb 11, 1878 on the invoice. A preliminary search of the US statutes from 1876 through early 1878 did not reveal any new laws pertaining to tobacco taxation on tobacco (domestic or imported). It would be necessary to backtrack through the statutes, perhaps as far back as 1869 or 70 to get a specific answer to your question. But I'll offer this... Surely, whatever tobacco Hoyt was selling was in stamped packages (in this case, barrels). And as you likely know, the gov't first required stamping of domestically-produced manufactured tobacco product packaging (excluding cigars) in 1868 — via the Act of 1868. Under those laws, tobacco could only be sold in specific ounce or pound weights as enumerated in the law. I believe it was illegal for a vendor to sell "loose" tobacco out of a larger (and stamped) package in arbitrary amounts. (I'm under the impression that the only way a tobacco retailer could buy in tobacco in bulk and sell it in smaller quantities was to dispense specific weights into smaller packages and have them stamped.) Additionally, the tax varied according to the type of tobacco product. Smoking tobacco was taxed at different rates than snuff, etc.

So now to Hoyt's notice... Any tobacco they sold would have to have been stamped. I don't think it was possible for Hoyt to sell a stamped package to a customer and then accept its return because there was no telling what type of tobacco product it might be exchanged for, or whether the tax paid was going to be equivalent. While Hoyt accommodated exchange of unopened tobacco, their requirement to be informed in writing was likely to establish a paper trail regarding what tax was paid on what in the event of an audit by a tax assessor. It would also prove that Hoyt wasn't buying already taxed tobacco from another vendor and then re-selling it, which may have invoked additional taxation.

I wouldn't presume this is referring to federal law. Since the notice deals with a consumer's right to return or exchange goods, it was probably referring to a newly enacted state law or city ordinance. The state or city could have attached consumer exchange terms to a local tax law.

Likewise, the company itself can refuse to accept back opened item. If that was the case using the "old" forms still makes sense. Likewise, if using the old forms up, if the tax laws were voided, then folks knew that paragraph on the form may not have applied.

CJ, re state or local tax laws, I'd say "possibly," but federal tobacco taxation laws would have to be taken into account.

Or the merchant got a deal on letterhead and it took several years to use it up. The text may not be current. How frequently we see the 3-digit year dates on forms!

As can be seen in these two images of Hoyt invoices, they used similar wording going back to at least 1869 (and changed their form in 1869). These images are from the Warshaw Collection of Business Americana at the National Museum of American History, of which I went through the entire tobacco ephemera collection back in 2019. There were many more examples in that collection, but at the time I thought it only necessary to photograph a few representative examples. Similar bills/invoices also show up on ebay from time to time.

My feeling is that Hoyt wouldn't have used forms with obsolete wording about tobacco taxation. I'm not saying that any of this is conclusive, but the wording on the 1869 form, at least, seems to point in the direction of federal revenue laws. I don't believe there were state or local tobacco taxes levied on manufactured tobacco back in 1868 or 1869 — at least none that required stamps. But my studies have been confined to federal tobacco taxation, not local.

Everything about the style of the letterhead is correct for the year. The major tax laws of the time was passed in 1862. That didn't change for the most part until 1883. That's federal of course. And as stated earlier, the tax rates were different for the various products. And since even one cent was real money at the time, and reuse and counterfeit stamps were a problem, the government tried to make it difficult to do so. And for sure the wholesale dealer didn't want anything back.

A quick rundown of the progression... Federal tobacco taxation on manufactured tobacco and cigars established with the Act of 1862 underwent yearly changes from 1863 to 1867, repealing taxes on some types of tobacco, adjusting the rates on others. The Act of 1864 inaugurated the requirement for cigar packaging (only) to be stamped, and addressed cigarette taxation for the first time.

The Act of 1868 represented a major overhaul of tobacco tax legislation, dispensing with the need for tobacco and cigar inspectors (tax assessors), inaugurating the use of stamps on all manufactured tobacco products, requiring that tobacco products be sold only in specific types of packaging, and (as already mentioned) in specific quantities. In fact, it was the tobacco lobby that approached Congress in 1868 with the idea of reducing rates and stamping tobacco, not the other way around. (It's a little-known fact that with the 1868 Act, certain types of tobacco were no longer taxed based on leaf stem content as they had been in the past).

1869 is as far as my studies go. It's been on my list to investigate federal tobacco taxation in later years. This thread might just get me to do that sooner than later.