United States v. Smith (75 U.S. 587)
ON certificate of division between the judges of the Northern District of Ohio; the case being this:The act of June 30th, 1864, 'to provide internal revenue to support the government, to pay interest on the public debt, and for other purposes,' enacts, by its 71st section, [*] that no person shall carry on the business of a coal oil distiller until he have obtained a license in the manner prescribed.
The 73d section subjects all persons who violate the enactment to fine and imprisonment.
'The 74th section enacts that all licenses granted after the 1st day of May in any year, shall continue inforce until the 1st day of May in any year next succeeding.'
The 53d section of the same act provides that any person required by law to be licensed as a distiller, before distilling any spirits, shall, in addition to what is required by other provisions of law, make an application for a license to the assessor of the district; and that before the same is issued the person applying shall give bond with surety conditioned that he will render to the assessor, on the certain days of each month, during the continuance of the license, an exact account of the number of gallons of spirits distilled, &c., and that he will pay to the collector the duties on them.
And the 94th section provides that 'distillers of coal oil shall be subject to all the provisions of laws applicable to distillers of spirits with regard to licenses, bonds, &c., and all other provisions designed for the purpose of securing the payment of duties, so far as the same may, in the judgment of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, and under regulations prescribed by him, be deemed necessary for that purpose.'
The act of June 30th, 1864-which is one of great length, and contains a hundred and eighty-two sections, some of them with numerous subdivisions and schedules-repeals a prior act of July 1st, 1862, with a title similar to its own.
With this statute of 1864 in force, Smith got a license as a distiller of coal oil on the 27th May, 1865, and gave bond with surety conditioned that he, Smith, should conform to all the provisions of an act entitled 'An act to provide internal revenue,' &c., approved July 1st, 1862, and of such other act or acts as were then or might thereafter be in that behalf enacted.
Upon suit brought by the United States against him and his surety in the court below, for breaches of the condition of the bond at various times during the months of June and July, 1866, the judges there were divided in opinion upon the question whether he or his surety were liable for any breach after the 1st of May, 1866; to wit, after the expiration of the license granted to them in May, 1865.
Mr. Hoar, Attorney-General, and Mr. Field, Assistant Attorney-General, for the United States; Mr. Wills, contra.
Mr. Justice GRIER delivered the opinion of the court.
^* 13 Stat. at Large, 248; and see § 79, art. 19.
|This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).|