PULP WOOD COMPANY

v.

GREEN BAY PAPER & FIBRE COMPANY

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Gould, 536 F.2d 216 (8th Cir. 1976)
  …en determine whether the District Court erred in instructing the jury that it must accept this fact as conclusive. The first aspect of this inquiry merits little discussion. In Hughes v. United States, 253 F. 543, 545 (8th Cir. 1918), cert. denied, 249 U.S. 610, 39 S.Ct. 291, 63 L.Ed. 801 (1919), this court stated: It is also urged that there was no evidence that morphine, heroin, and cocaine are derivatives of opium and coca leaves. We think that is a matter of which notice may be taken. In a sense the q…
• Hanf v. United States, 235 F.2d 710 (8th Cir. 1956)
  …also that a statute with the primary purpose of suppressing the drug habit bore a substantial relation to revenue. United States v. Goldberg, 8 Cir., 1955, 225 F. 2d 180, 186, 188; Hughes v. United States, 8 Cir., 1918, 253 F. 543, certiorari denied 249 U.S. 610, 39 S.Ct. 291, 63 L.Ed. 801. Affirmed.…
• Lewis v. United States, 170 F.2d 43 (9th Cir. 1948)
  …the raising of revenue by bringing such traffic into the open, and reflect an incidental or secondary motive of Congress to suppress the harmful use of the drugs taxed. Hughes v. United States, 8 Cir., 1918, 253 F. 543, 545, certiorari denied, 1919, 249 U.S. 610, 39 S.Ct. 291, 63 L.Ed. 801; Nigro v. United States, 1927, 276 U.S. 332, 48 S.Ct. 388, 72 L.Ed. 600; Casey v. United States, 1927, 276 U.S. 413, 48 S.Ct. 373, 72 L.Ed. 632. Appellant’s final contention is that she is not a “person” within 26 U.S.C.…