crap. 11] THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA 905 
total majority was very large ; it became law as Act No. 3 
of 19102} 
There are certain limitations and qualifications of the 
powers of the Commonwealth with regard to the states 
which are set out in ss. 112-7. After the imposition of 
uniform duties of customs, a state may levy on imports or 
exports such charges as may be necessary for executing the 
inspection laws of the state, but the net produce of such 
duties shall be for the use of the Commonwealth, and any such 
inspection law may be annulled by the Parliament of the 
Commonwealth, the only case in which the Federal Parlia- 
ment is permitted to render void by declaration a state Act? 
All fermented, distilled, or other intoxicating liquids passing 
into any state, or remaining therein for use, consumption, 
sale, or storage, shall be subject to the laws of the state, as if 
such liquids had been produced in the state.? A state shall 
not without the consent of the Parliament of the Common- 
wealth raise or maintain any kind of naval force, or military 
force, or impose a tax or duty of any kind on property 
belonging to the Commonwealth, nor reciprocally can the 
Commonwealth impose any tax on property of any kind 
belonging to the state. The effect of this section has been 
considered in the Courts. In the case of Municipal Council 
of Sydney v. Commonwealth?® it was held that the Common- 
wealth could not be rated on land transferred by New South 
Wales under ss. 85 (i) and 86 of the Constitution. The lands 
had paid rates while state property, and it was argued that 
by s. 108 the liability remained on the transfer, but the Court 
decided against the view, and maintained that by permitting 
the continuance of the tax a tax would be just as much 
imposed as if newly enacted. They laid it down, therefore, 
that s. 110 of the New South Wales Act, No. 35 of 1902, must 
not be claimed to be meant to apply to federal land. 
' See p. 901, n. 1. ® Cf, Clark, op. cit., pp. 82, 135-8. 
3 Cf. Fox v. Robbins, (1909) 8 C. L. R. 115. This excludes the operation 
of the United States decision in Leisy v. Hardin, 135 U. 8. 100; Harrison 
Moore, op. cit., p. 671. *1C LR. 208.