May v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Missouri. Ered D. May and others were convicted of carrying on the business of manufacturing oleomargarine without having paid the special tax therefor, and they bring error.
1Opinion of the Court
WILLARD, District Judge.
[1] Plaintiffs in error, Ered D. May, Thomas B. May, William M. Johnson, and E. W. Bailey, were convicted under the second count of an indictmenf which charged a violation of section 4 of the Oleomargarine Act of August 2, 1886, c. 840, 24 Stat. 209 (U S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 2229). This section punishes one who carries on the business of manufacturing oleomargarine without having paid the special tax therefor. They were also convicted under the third count, which charged a violation of section 17 of the same act. No objection to the sufficiency of the second count is…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Armour Packing Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Smith v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Ledbetter v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- United States v. SimmonsSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Armour Packing Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1907
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Jelke v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1918
- Preeman v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1917
- Capone v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1932
- United States v. MiroCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1932
- Doe v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1918
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.