Buckalew v. United States

• Decision Date: 08 June 1900
• Docket Number: 924.
• Citation: 102 F. 320
• Parties: BUCKALEW v. UNITED STATES.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

102 F. 320

BUCKALEW v. UNITED STATES.

No. 924.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

June 8, 1900

Plaintiff in error was charged by indictment in the United States district court for the Northern district of Texas, at Ft Worth, with a violation of the internal revenue act of 1898 in failing to properly stamp with adhesive stamps an accident policy of insurance issued by him as agent for the Travelers' Insurance Company to one Bill Smith; to which he pleaded not guilty, was tried upon an agreed statement of facts, and was found guilty, and sentenced to pay a fine of $10. Motion for a new trial was made and overruled, writ of error applied for and obtained from this court, and the necessary bonds duly given, and the errors complained of are now presented to this court.

The case was tried on an agreed statement of facts, which is attached to the general bill of exceptions herein, which shows the facts to be as follows: 'First. That the defendant, Sam Buckalew, is the duly authorized and constituted agent of the Travelers' Insurance Company of Hartford, Conn., doing a life and accident business in the state of Texas. Second. That on the 17th day of September 1899, the said defendant, Sam Buckalew, in the prosecution of his business as such agent, accepted from one Bill Smith an application for an accident policy in the sum of $1,500, on which the total premium for one year from said date was the sum of $18.75, which premium was to be paid in four separate payments, the first of which was to be $4.70, payable November 17, 1899; $4.70 on January 17, 1900; $4.65 on March 17, 1900; and $4.75 on May 17, 1900. That the said Bill Smith was an employe of the Texas & Pacific Railway. That, by arrangement between the said insurance company and said railway company, accident policies of this character were arranged to be written and paid for in installments, by orders given by the insured on the paymaster of said railway company. That a true copy of the application made by the said Bill Smith to the said Travelers' Insurance Company for said accident policy is hereto attached, marked 'Exhibit B,' and made a part thereof. That the said defendant Buckalew, as the agent of the said Travelers' Insurance Company, executed and delivered to the said Bill Smith an accident policy in the sum of $1,500, a true copy of which is hereto attached, marked 'Exhibit C,' and made a part hereof. Third. That on September 17, 1899, the said Buckalew placed and canceled internal revenue stamps on said application for said policy in the sum of 2 1/2 cents, the amount required by law for the first premium. That no stamp whatever was placed upon or canceled on the policy. Fourth. That the defendant, Buckalew, in stamping the application of the said Bill Smith, instead of the policy, acted under instructions of the said Travelers' Insurance Company, directing him in detail how to stamp insurance contracts in such matters. Fifth. That at the time of the taking of said application and the execution of said policy the said Buckalew intended, at the payment of the first premium of $4.70, to place additional stamps on said application in the same amount, and to cancel same to cover the second period of said contract, and that same was paid at the time specified in said contract, and additional stamps, amounting to 2 1/2 cents, placed on said application, and canceled. And that he intended, at the payment of the second premium, to place a like amount of stamps thereon, and cancel same, covering the second period of insurance called for in said policy, and that said premium was paid, and that he did place on said application and cancel 2 1/2 cents in internal revenue stamps. And that he intended, on the payment of the third premium, to likewise place additional stamps thereon, and that said premium was paid, and 2 1/2 cents additional in revenue stamps were placed on said application, and canceled. And that he likewise intended, upon the payment of the said last premium, to place thereon the necessary additional internal revenue stamps, and cancel same, and that same were placed thereon, and duly canceled; and that such was his custom, and the custom of other agents, acting under instructions from said company in matters of like character. Sixth. That it is not the intention of the government to admit, by making this agreement, that the placing and cancellation of said internal revenue stamps upon said application is admissible...