Case Name: C. H. LAWRENCE & CO. v. SEYBURN, Collector of Internal Revenue
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1913-02-25
Citations: 202 F. 913
Docket Number: No. 2,370
Parties: C. H. LAWRENCE & CO. v. SEYBURN, Collector of Internal Revenue.
Judges: Before PARDEE and SHELBY, Circuit Judges, and GRUBB, District Judge.
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 202
Pages: 913–913

Head Matter:
C. H. LAWRENCE & CO. v. SEYBURN, Collector of Internal Revenue.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
February 25, 1913.)
No. 2,370.
1. Appeal and Error (§ 730 ) — Assignments oe Error — Insteuctions—-Re-view-RECORD.
Charges given will not be reviewed, where the assignments of error state no facts proven or in issue to enable the appellate court to determine whether the charges were material or relevant to the issue submitted to the jury. •
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Appeal and Error, Cent. Dig. §§ 3013-3016; Dec. Dig. § 730. ]
2. Internal Revenue (§ 16 ) — Adulterated Butteb — Taxation—Intent.
For a dealer in adulterated butter to be liable to the internal revenue tax imposed by Act Cong. May 9, 1902, c. 784, 32 Stat. 193 (U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1911, p. 1339), it is immaterial whether the dealer knowingly engaged in the business or not.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Internal Revenue, Dec. Dig. § 16. ]
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Louisiana; Rufus E. Foster, Judge.
■ Action by C. H. Lawrence & Company against Edward I. Seyburn, as Collector of Internal Revenue for the District of Louisiana, to recover taxes assessed against plaintiffs as wholesale dealers in adulterated butter and paid under protest to avoid threatened prosecution, for penalties. From a judgment in 'favor of defendant, plaintiff brings error.
Affirmed.
Jno. D. Rouse, Wm. Grant, and W. B. Grant,'all of New Orleans, La., for plaintiff in. error.
Charlton R. Beattie, U. S. Atty., of New Orleans, La., for defendant in error.
Before PARDEE and SHELBY, Circuit Judges, and GRUBB, District Judge.
For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to ¿ate, & Rep’r Indexes

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The first and second bills of exception upon, which the first four assignments of error are predicated show no state of facts proven or in issue for the court to determine whether or not the court's charges to the jury specially excepted to were material or even relevant to the issue to be submitted to the jury, and therefore neither of the said assignments is well taken.
For a dealer in adulterated butter to be liable to a tax by the United States under the statute approved May 9, 1902, c. 784, 32 Statutes at Large, p. 193 (U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1911, p. 1339), it is immaterial whether or not the said dealer "knowingly" engaged in the business.
We find no reversible error in the transcript, and the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.