Stanworth

This is an appeal from a judgment of conviction under the so-called Bone Dry Act of Alaska ( 39 Stat. 903 [ 48 U.S.C.A. §§ 261 — 291]). The sole contention made in support of the appeal is that the act under which the conviction was had has been superseded by the National Prohibition Act (27 U.S.C.A.). It is conceded that this court has decided otherwise in Abbate v. United States, 270 F. 735 ; Koppitz v. United States, 272 F. 96 ; Simpson v. United States, 290 F. 963 , certiorari denied, 263 U.S. 707 , 44 S.Ct. 35 , 68 L.Ed. 517 ; Peterson v. United States, 297 F. 1000 , and inferentially in United States v. Berkeness, 16 F.(2d) 115 , affirmed on certiorari, 275 U.S. 149 , 48 S. Ct. 46 , 72 L.Ed. 211 . The apology offered for again trespassing on the time of the court is that the Abbate and Koppitz Cases were decided before the National Prohibition Act was extended to the territory of Alaska by the Willis-Campbell Act ( 42 Stat. 223 [ 27 U.S.C.A. § 2 ]), and that the later cases simply reaffirm the earlier ones without dis *575 cussion. There is no merit in this contention. In both the majority and dissenting opinions in the Abbate Case, it was assumed, and we think rightly, that…