Court Opinion

ID: 9418569
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 22:32:24.006783+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:22:06.089655
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Stone,
concurring.
I agree that the Willis-Campbell Act requires § 3450 of the Revised Statutes- and § 26 of the National Prohibition law to be so construed as to stand together in so far as they are not in direct conflict. I agree also that there conceivably may be a deposit or concealment of illicit liquor in an automobile with intent to defraud the United States of the tax upon it, which is not transportation within the meaning of § 26 and to that extent the two sections are not in conflict. But I cannot subscribe to those expressions in the opinion which seem to suggest that the two sections are not in direct conflict, in a case where there is transportation of liquor in a vehicle in violation of the National Prohibition law with intent to defraud the United States of the tax. In that case § 26, it seems to me, plainly directs that the seizure shall be made and proceedings for forfeiture of the seized vehicle had under that section. In that event § 26 saves the interest of the innocent owner or lienor from the forfeiture required by § 3450. It appears to me that the conflict -in such a case is direct and that § 26 by its terms is controlling.