Case ID: johns_11/html/0179-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Lawrence against Gracy.
    NEW-YORK,
    May, 1814.
    in an action for [oMUnfiqSors* without a li24. c. 164. 1 "defendant tícense from to^vtom^he* *^red! sum
    IN ERROR, on certiorari, from a justice’s court. Lawrence sued Gracy for the penalty of 25 dollars, under the statute, passed the 7th April, 1801, (sess.24. c. 164. s. 9. 1 N. R. L. 176.) for retailing spirituous liquors without a license. Upon the trial it appeared that the defendant did, on the 7th April, 1812, being town-meeting day, sell liquor in his waggon house. The defendant, as his justification, proved .that he paid to the supervisor of the town (Stillwater) six dollars, for the license, to be applied to the use of the poor; and that a license was given by the supervisor and justices to sell liquor on that day. It appeared, however, that the license or permission was by parol. This was objected to, but admitted by the justice, and the jury found a verdict for the defendant, on which the justice gave judgment.
   Per Curiam.

The statute requires the license to be in writing, under the hand and seal of the respective commissioners -authorized to grant the same. The clause under which this suit is brought declares, that if any person shall sell by retail, any strong or spirituous liquors, without having such license as ■ aforesaid, he shall forfeit the sum of 25 dollars. The license proved by the defendant was not such a one as the act requires. The evidence of a parol license ought not, therefore, to have been received, and could not amount to an authority to sell liquors. The offence having been made out, and no sufficient justification shown, the plaintiff was entitled to recover. The judgment must,- therefore, be reversed.

Judement reversed.