CHANROBLES VIRTUAL LAW LIBRARY
US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for www.chanrobles.com


UNITED STATES V. BARNES, 222 U. S. 513 (1912)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 222 U. S. 513 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

United States v. Barnes, 222 U.S. 513 (1912)

United States v. Barnes

No. 565

Argued October 24, 1911

Decided January 9, 1912

222 U.S. 513

Syllabus

The maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius is a rule of construction, and not of substantive law, and serves only as an aid in discovering legislative intent when not otherwise manifest.

The mention in the Oleomargarine Act of August 2, 1886, c. 840, 24 Stat. 209, 3, of certain specified sections of the Revised Statutes, which relate to special taxes, as applicable to the special taxes imposed by § 3, may exclude other sections relating to special taxes but does not exclude as inapplicable to the collection of the taxes imposed by, and enforcement of, the Oleomargarine Act, § 3177, Rev.Stat., which is general in its terms, and relates to all articles and objects subject to internal revenue tax.

In view of the custom of embodying national legislation in codes and systematic collections of general rules, it is the settled rule of decision of this Court that subsequent legislation upon a subject covered by a previous codification carries the implication that general rules are not superseded by such subsequent legislation except where it clearly appears.

Where there is a codification of revenue laws to prevent fraud, the inference is that subsequent legislation is auxiliary to the earlier, and only in case of manifest repugnancy will it be construed as an abrogation thereof. @ 41 U. S. 363.

The facts, which involve the construction of the Oleomargarine Act of 1886, and the applicability of § 3177, Rev.Stat., are stated in the opinion. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 222 U. S. 516





Back
ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for chanrobles.com Search for www.chanrobles.com


Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



www.chanrobles.us




QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

Browse By ->> Volume


cralaw

Browse By ->> Year


cralaw

  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
 
RED