Tombstone epitaph., 1921-05-29
TO DECIDE WHETHER cEv LAW NUlliFiEp
 PREVIOUS MEASURES

nullifieG ,he sections of the internal revenu" aci which nave to do with the illegal manufacture of fntoxicants or whether those sections are still in full effect and may be invoked in the prosecution of violators of the na- t;onal prohibition amendment. is to be decided by the supreme court of the United states. according to word received yesterday by Thomas A. Flynn. United States attorney. Noti- ;ication to this effect was made hy the clerk of the circuit court of ap- peals for the ninth district. San Fran cisco. in the case of James l.. Brooks. Brooks was convicted at Tucson on April l5. 1920, on charge of hay ing violated the internal revenue laws There were four counts in the indict- ment, as follows:
 Setting up still without register ing t.
 Carrying on the business of dis iiller without giving bond
 Making mash for the production Of spirits in building other than a duly authorized distillery.
 Separating spirits !-oa. :hc mash without being an authorized distiller. Brooks was found guilty on the four counts and was sentenced to serve year and day at the federal penitentiary at Leavenworth, Kansas. and 10 pay q fine of s2.l00. The acts alleged in the case against him were committed about seven days after the national prohibition amendment went the defendant through his counsel, sued out a writ Of error to the circuit court of appeals asking for a reversal of the judgment and conviction on the ground that the national prohibition act repealed the internal revenue laws under which he had been indicted and convicted The government, on the other hand. contended that the prohi- bition act does not repeal the inter- nal revenue sections involved in the Brooks indictmen:
 The various United States courts. both circuit courts of appeals and district courts. have rendered from time to time divergent opinions as to whether the national prohibition act provides the exclusive remedy for vio- lations formerly denounced by the in ternal revenue laws. The circuit court of appeals therefore has certified the questions of law involved directly to the United States supreme court to secure a final and authoritative deci- sion on the question.
 So far as the United States attor- ney is advised. this is the first case to be presented to the supreme court for 2 sett!e:,en: of this much iisrnss- ed question. and the decision will he looked forward to with much inter- est. as it will determine the procedure in all future cases of like character The penalties under the prohibition law are less severe than those provid- ed by the former internal revenue laws. and for the first offenders no greater than jail sentence can be imposed for the sale and manufacture for possession and transportation, fines alone can be imposed for the first offenses.
 The questions which the circuit court of appeals certified to the su- preme court are four in number, three of which refer to offenses alleged in the Brccks indictment and. the fourth being as follows:
 Tn case i: shai. be decided by the supreme court that the sections of the revised statutes above named and the offenses therein defined have been re- peaIed by virtue of the provisions of the said national prohibition act, should the United States circuit court of appeals for the ninth circuit set aside the judgment and sentence i'm posed in said cause by the United States district court for the district of Arizsna ard remand said cause 'o said court. with instructions to enter judgment and impose sentence upon the plaintiff in error in accordance with the said national prohibition act"