1. Vehicles employed in the unlawful importation of intoxicating
liquors may be seized and forfeited under the Tariff Act and the
provisions of the Revised Statutes ancillary thereto.
General
Motors Acceptance Corp. v. United States, ante, p.
286 U. S. 49. P.
286 U. S.
66.
Page 286 U. S. 64
2. This extends to vehicles that take up the contraband after it
has crossed the border and act as implements or links in a
continuous process of carriage from the foreign country into this
one. P.
286 U. S. 67.
3. When the two federal courts below are in agreement as to the
inferences fairly to be gathered from the facts, their findings are
not to be disturbed unless clearly erroneous.
Id.
53 F.2d 977 reversed.
46 F.2d 171 affirmed.
Certiorari, 285 U.S. 534, to review the reversal of a judgment
of the District Court forfeiting automobiles which had been seized
and libeled by the United States for breach of the custom laws. The
above-named respondent, claiming as
bona fide lienor,
filed an intervening petition, which was dismissed.
Page 286 U. S. 66
MR. JUSTICE CARDOZO delivered the opinion of the Court.
Three motor cars were seized by a customs officer of the United
States in Texas near the Mexican border on a charge that they were
employed in the unlawful importation of intoxication liquors.
Following the seizure, the government filed a libel of
information against the automobiles so employed under §§
3061 and 3062 of the Revised Statutes (19 U.S.Code, §§
482 and 483) and prayed for a decree of forfeiture.
Thereupon, the Commercial Credit Company, Inc., the holder of a
chattel mortgage, filed an intervening petition alleging that its
lien had been created in good faith; that it was innocent of any
participation in the wrongful use of the cars, and that, by force
of § 26 of the National Prohibition Act, it should have an
award of the possession. The District Court dismissed the
intervening claim and adjudged a forfeiture, holding that
§§ 3061 and 3062 of the Revised Statutes were unrepealed
by § 26 of the National Prohibition Act, and permitted the
forfeiture of articles illegally employed in the importation of
intoxicating liquors.
United States v. One Fargo Truck, 46
F.2d 171. The Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decree and
dismissed the libels, holding that § 26 of the National
Prohibition Act had superseded other remedies. 53 F.2d 977. A writ
of certiorari has brought the case here.
Our judgment handed down herewith in
General Motors
Acceptance Corporation v. United States of America, ante, p.
286 U. S. 49,
sustains the position of the government that vehicles employed in
the unlawful importation of intoxicating liquors may be seized
under the Tariff Act and the provisions of the Revised Statutes
ancillary thereto. All that remains is to determine whether these
vehicles were so employed. The cars subjected to forfeiture in No.
574 were the same that had brought the contraband merchandise from
beyond
Page 286 U. S. 67
the Mexican border. The cars libeled in this proceeding were
laden with the liquors, for all that the evidence shows, on this
side of the border line.
The difference is not one that exacts differing relief. The
circumstantial evidence justifies a finding that the cars, wherever
laden, were implements or links in a continuous process of carriage
from Mexico into Texas. This was unlawful importation, as well as
unlawful transportation. The two courts below are in agreement as
to the inferences fairly to be gathered from the facts, and their
findings are not to be disturbed unless clearly erroneous.
Washington Securities Co. v. United States, 234 U. S.
76,
234 U. S. 78;
Texas & N.O. R. Co. v. Brotherhood of Railway Clerks,
281 U. S. 548,
281 U. S.
558.
The decree of the Circuit Court of Appeals should be reversed,
and that of the District Court affirmed.
MR. JUSTICE STONE took no part in the consideration and decision
of this case.
