Слике страница

Opinion of the Court.

according to its grammatical construction and natural meaning, an appeal to be taken from the whole of such interlocutory order or decree, and not from that part of it only which grants or continues an injunction.

The manifest intent of this provision, read in the light of the previous practice in the courts of the United States, contrasted with the practice in courts of equity of the highest authority elsewhere, appears to this court to have been, not only to permit the defendant to obtain immediate relief from an injunction, the continuance of which throughout the progress of the cause might seriously affect his interests; but also to save both parties from the expense of further litigation, should the appellate court be of opinion that the plaintiff was not entitled to an injunction because his bill had no equity to support it.

The power of the appellate court over the cause, of which it has acquired jurisdiction by the appeal from the interlocutory decree, is not affected by the authority of the court appealed from, recognized in the last clause of the section, and often exercised by other courts of chancery, to take further proceedings in the cause, unless in its discretion it orders them to be stayed, pending the appeal. Hovey v. McDonald, 109 U. S. 150, 160, 161; In re Haberman Co., 147 U. S. 525; Messonnier v. Kauman, 3 Johns. Ch. 66.

In each of the cases now before the court, therefore, the Circuit Court of Appeals, upon appeal from the interlocutory decree of the Circuit Court, granting an injunction and ordering an account, had authority to consider and decide the case upon its merits, and thereupon to render or direct a final decree dismissing the bill.

In the second case, it was argued, in support of the petition for a writ of certiorari, that the Circuit Court, upon receiving the mandate of the Circuit Court of Appeals directing a dismissal of the bill, erred in entering a final decree accordingly, without further hearing; and that the Circuit Court of Appeals erred in dismissing an appeal from that decree. But the rule to show cause did not proceed upon that ground. And the merits of the case, having been once determined by

Statement of the Case.

the appellate court in reversing the interlocutory decree, were not open to reconsideration at a later stage of the same case, either in that court or in the court below. Sanford Fork & Tool Co., petitioner, 160 U. S. 247, and cases there cited; Great Western Tel. Co. v. Burnham, 162 U. S. 339. Had the case been heard anew in each court after the first mandate, the only difference in the result would have been an affirmance, instead of a dismissal, upon the second appeal. That difference, not affecting the essential rights of the parties, is no ground upon which this court should exercise its discretionary power of issuing a writ of certiorari.

It follows that, in the first case, in accordance with the stipulation of the parties, the writ of certiorari heretofore granted is dismissed; and, in the second case, the writ of certiorari is denied. Judgments accordingly.

In re KOLLOCK, Petitioner.


No. 9. Original. Argued January 25, 1897. — Decided March 1, 1897.

The act of August 2, 1886, c. 840, imposing a tax upon, and regulating the manufacture, sale, etc. of oleomargarine, required packages thereof to be marked and branded; prohibited the sale of packages that were not, and prescribed the punishment of sales in violation of its provisions. It authorized the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to make regulations describing the marks, stamps and brands to be used. Held, that such leaving the matter of designating the marks, brands and stamps to the Commissioner, with the approval of the Secretary, involved no unconstitutional delegation of power.

KOLLOCK was indicted in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia for the violation of the sixth section of the act of Congress approved August 2, 1886, 24 Stat. 209, c. 840, entitled "An act defining butter, also imposing a tax upon and regulating the manufacture, sale, importation and exportation of oleomargarine"; and also for carrying on in the District the business of a retail dealer in oleomargarine without having paid the special tax thereon. He was arraigned,

Statement of the Case.

tried and convicted on each indictment and was sentenced to fine and imprisonment on the first, and to fine on the second, with costs on both, and to stand committed further in default of payment.

December 14, 1896, he was committed to the custody of the United States marshal of the District of Columbia, and on the same day filed his petition in this court alleging that he was deprived of his liberty unlawfully, in that the law under which he was convicted is in violation of the Constitution and laws of the United States, for the reason that "it is not within the power of the Congress of the United States under the Constitution of the United States to delegate to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue or the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States, or any other person, authority or power to determine what acts shall be criminal, and the said act of Congress aforesaid does not sufficiently define, or define at all, what acts done or omitted to be done within the supposed purview of the said act shall constitute an offence or offences against the United States"; and praying for a writ of habeas corpus.

Leave was given to file the petition and a rule to show cause was entered thereon, petitioner being admitted to bail, to which the marshal made return that he held petitioner pursuant to the judgment and sentence of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, until he was released from custody on giving bail in compliance with the order of this


It appeared that Kollock had appealed to the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia, which affirmed the judgments below, 25 Wash. Law Rep. 41, in accordance with the decision of that court in Prather v. United States, 24 Wash. Law Rep. 395.

The act of Congress in question consists of twenty-one sec tions: Sections 1 and 2 define butter and oleomargarine; section 3 imposes special taxes on manufacturers, wholesale dealers and retail dealers in oleomargarine; section 4 prescribes penalties for carrying on business as manufacturer, wholesale dealer and retail dealer without payment of

Statement of the Case.

taxes; and section 5, the duty of the manufacturer as to notice, etc., keeping books, etc., and conduct of business.

Section 6 is as follows:

"That all oleomargarine shall be packed by the manufacturer thereof in firkins, tubs or other wooden packages not before used for that purpose, each containing not less than ten pounds, and marked, stamped and branded as the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, shall prescribe; and all sales made by manufacturers of oleomargarine, and wholesale dealers in oleomargarine shall be in original stamped packages. Retail dealers in oleomargarine must sell only from original stamped packages, in quantities not exceeding ten pounds, and shall pack the oleomargarine sold by them in suitable wooden or paper packages, which shall be marked and branded as the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, shall prescribe. Every person who knowingly sells or offers for sale, or delivers or offers to deliver, any oleomargarine in any other form than in new wooden or paper packages as above described, or who packs in any package any oleomargarine in any manner contrary to law, or who falsely brands any package or affixes a stamp on any package denoting a less amount of tax than that required by law, shall be fined for each offence not more than one thousand dollars, and be imprisoned not more than two years."

Section 7 provides that every manufacturer shall affix a label on each package manufactured under penalty; section. 8, for a tax on the manufacture to be represented by coupon stamps, the requirements of law as to stamps relating to tobacco and snuff being made applicable; section 9, for the assessment of taxes on oleomargarine sold without using stamps; section 10, for an additional tax on imported oleomargarine; section 11, a penalty for purchasing or receiving for sale any oleomargarine not branded or stamped according to law; section 12, a penalty for purchasing or receiving for sale any oleomargarine from any manufacturer who has not paid the special tax; section 13, for the destruction of stamps on

Statement of the Case.

stamped packages when empty; and section 14, for a chemist and microscopist in the office of the Commissioner, etc.; and the Commissioner is authorized to decide what substances, etc., submitted to inspection in contested cases shall be taxed under the act.

Section 15 is as follows:

"That all packages of oleomargarine subject to tax under this act, that shall be found without stamps or marks as herein provided, and all oleomargarine intended for human consumption which contains ingredients adjudged, as herein before provided, to be deleterious to the public health, shall be forfeited to the United States.

"Any person who shall wilfully remove or deface the stamps, marks or brands on packages containing oleomargarine taxed as provided herein shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall be punished by a fine of not less than one hundred dollars nor more than two thousand dollars, and by imprisonment for not less than thirty days nor more than six months."

Section 16 provides for the exportation of oleomargarine; and section 17 imposes a penalty for fraud by the manufacturer in relation to the tax.

Section 18 is as follows:

"That if any manufacturer of oleomargarine, any dealer therein or any importer or exporter thereof shall knowingly or wilfully omit, neglect or refuse to do, or cause to be done, any of the things required by law in the carrying on or conducting of his business, or shall do anything by this act prohibited, if there be no specific penalty or punishment imposed by any other section of this act for the neglecting, omitting or refusing to do, or for the doing or causing to be done, the thing required or prohibited, he shall pay a penalty of one thousand dollars; and if the person so offending be the manufacturer of or a wholesale dealer in oleomargarine, all the oleomargarine owned by him, or in which he has any interest as owner, shall be forfeited to the United States."

Section 19 provides for the recovery of fines, etc.
Sections 20 and 21 read:


« ПретходнаНастави »