Scott v. United States

Decision Date08 July 1935
Docket NumberNo. 1267.,1267.
Citation78 F.2d 791
PartiesSCOTT v. UNITED STATES.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit

Hugh B. Woodward, of Albuquerque, N. M. (Woodward & Wilson and K. Gill Shaffer, all of Albuquerque, N. M., on the brief), for appellant.

William J. Barker, U. S. Atty., of Santa Fe, N. M., for the United States.

Before PHILLIPS, McDERMOTT, and BRATTON, Circuit Judges.

PHILLIPS, Circuit Judge.

The indictment herein charged that Scott and others on July 31, 1934, in the District of New Mexico "unlawfully, * * * and feloniously had in their possession or custody * * * a still * * * set up and in operation, which * * * was not registered with the Collector of Internal Revenue of the aforesaid District and as required by law."

It was challenged by demurrer on the ground that it failed to allege facts constituting a crime against the United States. The demurrer was overruled, and Scott was tried, convicted and sentenced.

26 USCA § 281 (Rev. St. § 3258, 15 St. 126, 17 St. 401, 402), reads as follows:

"Every person having in his possession or custody or under his control, any still or distilling apparatus set up, shall register the same with the collector of the district in which it is, by subscribing and filing with him duplicate statements, in writing, setting forth the particular place where such still or distilling apparatus is set up, the kind of still and its cubic contents, the owner thereof, his place of residence, and the purpose for which said still or distilling apparatus has been or is intended to be used; one of which statements shall be retained and preserved by the collector, and the other transmitted by him to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. Stills and distilling apparatus shall be registered immediately upon their being set up. Every still or distilling apparatus not so registered, together with all personal property in the possession or custody, or under the control of such person, and found in the building, or in any yard or inclosure connected with the building in which the same may be set up, shall be forfeited. And every person having in his possession or custody, or under his control, any still or distilling apparatus set up which is not so registered, shall pay a penalty of $500, and shall be fined not less than $100, nor more than $1,000, and imprisoned for not less than one month, nor more than two years."

This section was repealed by the National Prohibition Act, 27 USCA §§ 1-89. United States v. Yuginovich, 256 U. S. 450, 41 S. Ct. 551, 65 L. Ed. 1043; United States v. Stafoff, 260 U. S. 477, 43 S. Ct. 197, 67 L. Ed. 358. It was re-enacted by the Act of November 23, 1921, 27 USCA, Sec. 3 (42 St. 223). United States v. Stafoff, supra.

Section 4, Act of March 3, 1927, the Prohibition Reorganization Act, 5 USCA § 281c (44 Stat. 1382) reads as follows:

"(a) The rights, privileges, powers, and duties conferred or imposed upon the Commissioner of Internal Revenue and his assistants, agents, and inspectors, by any law in respect of the taxation, importation, exportation, transportation, manufacture, production, compounding, sale, exchange, dispensing, giving away, possession, or use of beverages, intoxicating liquors, or narcotic drugs, or by Title 27, or any other law relating to the enforcement of the eighteenth amendment, are hereby transferred to, and conferred and imposed upon, the Secretary of the Treasury.

"(b) The Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to confer or impose any of such rights, privileges, powers, and duties upon the Commissioner of Prohibition, or any of the officers or employees of the Bureau of Prohibition, and to confer or impose upon the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, or any of the officers or employees of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, any of such rights, privileges, powers, and duties which, in the opinion of the Secretary, may be necessary in connection with internal revenue taxes."

Art. 18 of Regulations No. 3 promulgated by the Prohibition Commissioner on October 1, 1927, required "proprietors, * * * distillers and all others who set up stills" to register them with the prohibition administrator. See United States v. Dibella (C. C. A. 2) 28 F.(2d) 805.

Sections 3 (a) and 5 (a) of the Prohibition Reorganization Act of 1930, 27 USCA, §§ 103 (a) and section 5 (a), as amended by Act March 31, 1933, 27 USCA § 105 (a), read as follows:

"§ 103. (a) Creation of enforcement division in Bureau of Prohibition in Treasury Department; apportionment of personnel, appropriations, records, files and property of Bureau. The Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney General by joint regulation shall, as soon as may be after May 27, 1930, create an enforcement division in the Bureau of Prohibition in the Treasury Department and place in and apportion to such enforcement division so much of the personnel, appropriations, records, files, and property of said bureau as they shall agree upon."

"§ 105. (a) Regulations relating to permits; forms of applications, bonds, permits, records and reports; regulations relating to Bureau of Prohibition in Department of Justice. The Attorney General and the Secretary of the Treasury shall jointly prescribe all regulations under this chapter and chapter 2 relating to permits and prescriptions for liquor for medicinal purposes, and the quantities of spirituous and vinous liquor that may be prescribed for medicinal purposes, and the form of all applications, bonds, permits, records, and reports under such chapters: Provided, That all regulations relating to the Bureau of Prohibition in the Department of Justice shall be made by the Attorney General."

Art. 14 of Regulations No. 3 prescribed jointly by the Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney General, effective April 1, 1931, in part reads as follows:

"Every person, including the proprietor of an industrial-alcohol plant, having in his...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • State v. Meany
    • United States
    • Minnesota Supreme Court
    • 18 Mayo 1962
    ...Mills, Inc., 18 F.R.D. 91; Roberson v. United States (5 Cir.) 249 F.2d 737, 72 A.L.R.2d 434.5 Cited with approval in Scott v. United States (10 Cir.) 78 F.2d 791.6 State v. Cook, 212 Minn. 495, 4 N.W.2d 323; State v. Clow, 215 Minn. 380, 10 N.W.2d 359; State v. Bolsinger, 221 Minn. 154, 21 ......
  • Czarnecki v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • 8 Febrero 1938
    ...2 Cir., 29 F.2d 694; Silva v. United States, 9 Cir., 35 F.2d 598; Connley et al. v. United States, 9 Cir., 46 F.2d 53; Scott v. United States, 10 Cir., 78 F.2d 791; Benton v. United States, 4 Cir., 80 F.2d 162. We refer particularly to the note upon this subject by Judge Soper to the opinio......
  • Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. McIlvaine
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • 19 Julio 1935
    ... ...         Petitioner seeks review of decisions of the United States Board of Tax Appeals denying petitioner's contention that the taxable estate comprises a ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT