UNITE» STATES 'V. BURGESS.
S., 8 Sup. Ct. Rep. 319, it is decided that the earnings of the yearl871,
have accrued within the time specified in the act. In Railroad Co. v.
and used in constructing new works, are not taxable under this law, because not embraced in the language of this act. The act of 1870 was part of the general system of income taxation, and it fixes the time within which the tax should cease, hence the reason for limiting the tax on interest to that which is paid during the year 1871. Another section of this act. (seventeenth) repealed the law which authorized the levying and collecting income tax after August 1, 1870, on interest paid. Thes8ving of all rights, etc., which had or might accrue, as is done in this and other acts repealing previous law3, can have no effect on the interest which became payable during and prior to the year 1871, but was not paid as alleged until 1872, because, if we are correct in our views, no right of taxation has accrued to the United States under either the act of 1862, 1864, as amended by the act of 1866, or the act of 1870. The of the defendant to the petition, as amended, should be sustained; and it is so ordered.
UNITED STATES V. BURGESS.
w: D. South
(Jarolina. February t, 1888.,
INTERNAL REVENUE-ILLICIT DrflTILL!l'G-REV. ST.
U. S. § 3279. One whoerect8 a "8hanty" in which i8 put up an illicit 8till, doe8 not come . u.nder Rev.. S.t. U. S. \ 32.79, WhiCh. provide8 that. "every per80n who works in . any di8tillery * * on which no 8ign i8 placed and kept, * * * 8hall be fined, " etc.
Indictment for Working in an illicit Distillery, in violation of Rev. St. U. S. § 3279. a. M. Jilur'TIian, Asst. Dist. Atty., for the United States. A. Blythe, for defendant.
SIMONTON, J. The evidence in this case is that the defendant erected for one Sessions a shanty in which was put up an illlicit still. There is no' evidence that he ever worked in or about the distillery after the f;till was set up. The defendant asks that the jury be instructed to find a verdict of not guilty. The section of the Revised Statutes punishes "every person who works in any distillery * * * on which no sign is placed and kept." Section 3279. Evidently this means, working in any establishment or place in which distilled liquors are made. The fad that no sign is placed and kept on the distillery is the gist of the of. fense. The first part of this section requires the sign to be put up by 8 person engaged in distilling. The work that defendant did in putting up the shanty is not the work in a distillery forbidden by this section. The jury will find a verdict of not guilty. v.33F.110.14-53
UNITED STATESV. DURHAM,
w: D. South. parolina.
Covil:n'En BY. . · , , .' '.:1f, 'pers,,OD.8 dealing.in. liquor.h,ave paid the special retail., tax for reta,i1ing at .di.stillery, they may fill orders at their placll, of business, and . send the Hquor to personsres1dmg at a distance. But they cannot make sales in smaH quantities frorb barrels to persons along the road"who pay them on receipt of the liquor. : .
RETAIL AT DISTIJ.LERy--SALE8
indictment for carrying on the business of retail liquor dealer, without having paid the tax.. . . C. ,M. JiUrm.an, Asst. U. S. Atty., for plaintiff. : A. Blythe, for defendant.
.I , "' ..l , '
rying on the business of a retail liquor dealer, and not having paid the special tax. Some witnesses swear to purchases of whisky from defendant at various times. Youare to decide whether they are credible witnesses. If you believe them, this will form your verdict. But the defendant, testifying in his own behalf, gives this account of the matter: He says that he and two other persons were the owners of a licensed distillery, near the North C.arolina line, in this state; that they also had paid the special tax for retailing liquor a.t the distillery; that they received, in due course of business, orders for whisky, apd" filling these orders, they seat their wagon, containing whisky in barrels, to different pnrts' of the state/20, 30, and 50 miles from their distillery; that, all the liquor which he delivered had been ordered in this way. When defendantwas arrested he was in charge of a wagon in which were three barrels,-two full, of whisky, and one Ilearly empty. I am, req ue&ted to charge, you, on this point. If parties dealing in liquor, who have paid the special tax, receive ordersJol' whisky at .their place of business, and fiU the orders so that the sale is consummated at their place of business,-Bo consummated that the property in the liquor passes to the purchaser,this ia"no ;violation pf t4e law, althougll they may sell and may send the , liqu,or to parties reE!idipg at a. distance. : .If, )}o",ever, they Vfl orders from persons at. a. distance, and in conof such orders the)? senp. out whisky in barrels, and, going through, the eountry, th,ey draw frQm the barrels, and deliver in small quantHies,-saya pint, quart, or galll:>O'-to parties who pay them on recElipt oLthe this is a of the law; the property in the whaskyjn the remains in the- eellers until it is delivered to .the purchaEler.. The sale upon the delivery of the whisky, :it ,is ,not protected by the tax paid for sales at the distillery.
J., (charging the jury.) The defenda,ntis indicted for ear-