Summary

George Sutherland United States v. Farrar — Opinion of the Court

If aid were needed to support this view of the matter, it would be found in the fact, conceded by the government's brief, that during the entire life of the National Prohibition Act, a period of ten years, the executive departments charged with the administration and enforcement of the act have uniformly construed it as not including the purchaser in a case like the present; no prosecution until the present one has ever been undertaken upon a different theory
Source: Wikisource

George Sutherland United States v. Farrar — Opinion of the Court

We are unable to find any logical ground for holding that the words 'no person' in section 10 are used in the restricted sense thus stated, but that identical words in section 6, which forms a part of the same general plan for controlling the authorized traffic in intoxicating liquors, may be given an unlimited application. Obviously the National Prohibition Act deals with the liquor traffic from two different points of view. In the case of beverage liquors, except for sacramental and medicinal purposes, the traffic is prohibited absolutely and unconditionally
Source: Wikisource

George Sutherland United States v. Farrar — Opinion of the Court

Section 6 of title 2 of the act, 41 Stat. 310 (27 USCA § 16) , provides: 'No one shall manufacture, sell, purchase, transport, or prescribe any liquor without first obtaining a permit from the commissioner so to do, except that a person may, without a permit, purchase and use liquor for medicinal purposes when prescribed by a physician as herein provided.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature