The Omaha morning bee. [volume] (Omaha [Neb.]) 1922-1927, 1922-12-12
Court
+ d SSeS on
Rum Cases
Government Wins Victory i'll
Suit From Washington =
Both Federal and State
Prosecutions Permissible.
Loses California Appeal

Loses California Appeal
Washington. Dec. 11.-CBy \. P.)-
Two cases considered by the govern.
nlent of major Importance in the en-
forcement of national prohibition
We're decided by the supreme court
today. In one OF them, coming from
the state of Washington, the govern
ment scored IA sweeping victory. the
court holding that both the fedral
and a state government can prose.
cute and punish the same unlawful
act in the manufacture, possession.
transportation or sale of Intoxicating
liquors
The other case coming from Cali
flnia, the government lost In its con.
tontion that in the enforcement OF
national prohibition an executive Of
ficer can impose and collect as taxes.
the assessments and penalties impos-
ed bp those sections of the revised
statutes which remain unrepealed by
tho Nolstead act and whica became
law while the manufacture and sale
of intoxicating liquor was not pro-
hibited
Decision Reversed.
The United States district court
for western Washington dismissed Il
federal indictment charging Vito Lan-
"a, Dick Barto and others with man
ufacturing, transporting and possess
ing Intoxicating liquors on the ground
that they had been tried and convict
ed in the state courts for the same Of
fense. In reversing this action today
the supreme court held that lin the
absence of special provision by con-
gtess, conviction and punishment in
a state court under Il state law for
making, transporting and selling in-
toxicating liquors is not bar to a
prosecution in court of the United
States under the federal law for the
same acts
The effect of the prohibition amend
menl. the court stated in an opinion
By chief Justice Taft, was to establish
prohibition In every part of the
United States and affecting transac-
tions which are essentially local or
intrastate, as well as those pertaining
TO Interstate or foreign commerce.
The power to take legislative meas.
ures to make the policy effective
existed In congress, the court con-
tinued I'm respect of the territorial
limits of the United States and at the
same time the like power of he several
states within their territorial limits
shall not cease to exist"
Nav Mako Seuarate LAWS
"Eeach state as also congress" It
added, may exercise an independent
Judgment in selecting and shaping
measures to enforce prohibition. Such
as are adopted by congress become
laws of the United States and such
rs are adopted by a state become laws
OF that state. They may vary In
many particulars. including the
ranalties prescribed, but this is an in.
separable incident of independent
legislative action In distinct juNsdic-
tions"
Referring to the contention by the
defendants that they could not be
placed In double jeopardy, the court
explained that the meaning of the
term double Jeopardy" as used in
the fifth amendment to the constitu
ton, referred TO "a second prosecu.
ton under the authority Of the fed
eral government after first trial for
the same offense under the same au-
thority." An act denounced as a
crime by both national and state
sovereignties, the court held. "is an
offense against the peace and dignity
OF both and may be punished by
each" If such construction did
rot apply. tho court stated, 1t would
be easy to imagine the rush of Of
tenders to state courts to plead guilty.
il by so doing they could obtain i'm.
muuity from federal prosecution for
the same act.
Find for Defendant.
The Regal Drug corporation OF San
Francisco, obtained a permit to with
>draw from bonded warehouses in.
Noxicating liquor and wine fer sale
under the prohibition act for non
beverage purposes. The permit was
cancelled and the collector of internal
revenue imposed upon the company.
in addition to those provided in the
prohibition enforcement act, ccrtain
taxes and penalties carried by un
repealed sections of the revised sta
tutes governing the manufacture and
sale Of distilled spirits with wine prior
to national prohibition.
The supreme court, In an opinion
by Justice McKenna. explained that
The court had held in the case OF
l.pke V. LeddreSl collector, decided
last June that coleetor of internal
revenue could not punish by fine and
penolty for an alleged criminal CT
fense without hesring, information
.l...,.,n,,t or trial by iury.