Facts: Balint unlawfully sold drugs under the Narcotics Act. He did not know the drugs he was selling were illegal.

Procedure: Indictment charged with unlawfully selling to another a certain amount of a derivative or opium and a certain amount of a derivative of coca leaves. D demurred to the indictment. District Court sustained the demurrer and quashed the indictment.

Issue: Was the district court correct in sustaining the demurrer and quashing the indictment? Demurred on the grounds that if failed to charge that they had sold the inhibited drugs knowing them to be such. Is punishing a person for an act in violation of the law when they were ignorant of the facts that make it so, an absence of due process of law?

Holding: The demurrer to the indictment should have been overruled. The district court was correct.

Rationale: The legislative intent must be examined. Congress weighed the possible injustice of subjecting an innocent seller to penalty against the evil of exposing innocent purchasers to danger from the drug. They concluded it was better to protect buyers from danger.

Policy/Notes: the narcotic act prohibited dealing in dangerous products. Used a tax system to regulate drug transactions. Were supposed to pay taxes on all drug transactions. Criminal if did not pay the tax.