State v. Delano
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
ON Exceptions. Indictment for being a common seller of intoxicating liquors. Respondent put in his license to sell. Plea not guilty. The jury found a general verdict of guilty, and specially that the "ale and whiskey sold by the respondent were manufactured in the United States, and that the U. S. revenue tax had been paid on them.” The presiding Judge held that the license and payment of the revenue tax constituted no defence, and the defendant alleged exceptions.
Read the full summary
ON Exceptions. Indictment for being a common seller of intoxicating liquors. Respondent put in his license to sell. Plea not guilty. The jury found a general verdict of guilty, and specially that the "ale and whiskey sold by the respondent were manufactured in the United States, and that the U. S. revenue tax had been paid on them.” The presiding Judge held that the license and payment of the revenue tax constituted no defence, and the defendant alleged exceptions. Tbe payment of the duty imposed by the U. S. statute, 1864, by the defendant, as the jury have specially found, gave him the…
1Opinion of the CourtWaltoN, J.
The question is whether payment of the United States excise tax, and a license from the United States internal revenue collector, will justify the sale of intoxicating liquors of domestic manufacture, in this State, in violation of the laws thereof.
Eor the defendant, it is contended that the State has no power to prohibit absolutely the sale of a commodity by one who has paid the United States excise tax upon it.
We hold otherwise. The revenue laws of the United States expressly provide, that no license shall, if granted, be held to exempt any person carrying on the business specified in the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- State v. LillardSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883