UNITED STATES V. BYRNE. 455 �Another ground for the motion in arrest of judgment is that the indictment alleges only that the defendant, on a day named, impOrted the woman into the city of New York, from Copenhagen, for the purposes of prostitution, at a place named in said city, and does not set for th' the acts constitut- ing the import'ation, as that. she paid the passage money of the woman. We think the indictment is sufficient. �The defendant also moves for a new trial on the ground that the verdict was against the evidence and the law, and was without evidence to sustain it. These jpositions are, we think, not tenable. �On the trial evidence was admitted, under an exception by the defendant, of the character of a houseof assignation kept in New York by the defendant, and of acts done at that house after the woman was imported, and while she lived there with the defendant. This evidence was proper to show the purpose of prostitution laid in the indictment; and related to the very place named in the indictment as that where the purpose of prostitution was to be oarried out. �The motions are denied. ���United States v. Bybne. �(Circuit Court, S. D. New YarTi. May 1«, 1881.) �IifTEHNAi. Revenue— Fraudulent Rectification of Spikits— Evi- DBNCB— Kev. Bt. } 3317—20 §t. at Lakgb, 339. �In a prosecution, by information, for the violation of section 3317 of the Revised Statutes, as amended by the act of Mareh 1, 1879, (20 St. at Large, 339,) evidence that the defendant had in hia possession a rectifying apparatus, and that illicit spirits had been conveyed to said apparatus in aie barrels, and, in the presence of the defendant, poured into the receiving tub of such apparatus on two difEerent occasions, under suspicions circumstances, is sufBcient to juptify a jury In flnding that the defendant was then carrying on the business of a rectifier, with intent to defraud the government of the tax on tha spirits there and then rectifled by such defendant. ��� �
