Joseph McKenna, Jordan v. Roche — Opinion of the Court
“ And, further, that bay rum, under the revenue act of June 13, 1898 [30 Stat. at L. 463, chap. 448] , was taxed or held taxable by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue under the head of 'perfumery and cosmetics.' So also the ruling of the Commissioner, it is urged, refusing to hold that druggists and bay rum dealers were liquor dealers, which, it is contended, he would necessarily have to hold them to be, if bay rum were to be considered an alcoholic distillate. It is not necessary to answer these contentions in detail. They have, when taken by themselves, an appearance of strength. ”
