Case ID: ill-app_193/html/0553-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Scholfield", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The People of the State of Illinois, Defendant in Error, v. John McDonald, Plaintiff in Error.
    (Not to he reported in full.)
    Error to the Circuit Court of Christian county; the Hon. Albert M. Rose, Judge, presiding.
    Heard in this court at the October term, 1914.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed April 16, 1915.
    Statement of the Case.
    Plaintiff in error, John McDonald, was convicted oh sixteen counts of an indictment charging him with a violation of the statute prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquor not in the original package outside the incorporated limits of any city, town or village, in less quantities than five gallons, in violation of the “Five Gallon Law,” sec. 16, ch. 43, page 1023, Hurd’s Rev. St., 1913 (J. & A. ft 4619). A motion to quash the indictment was overruled. Judgment was entered on the verdict and the penalty fixed at fifty dollars on each count, and thirty days in jail on each of the first ten counts, the jail sentence to run consecutively, the second beginning at the end of the first and continuing until the entire time of three hundred days was served out. From such conviction, the defendant appeals.
    Each count of the indictment averred that in the county of Christian the plaintiff in error, on, etc., “not then and there having a legal license to keep a dram-shop, unlawfully did then and there sell intoxicating liquor in. less quantities than five gallons, and not in the original-package as put up by the manufacturers, the said place where said intoxicating liquors were so sold not being within the incorporated limits of any city, town or village, contrary,” etc. The defendant contended that the indictment was double and that it charged him with keeping a dramshop without a license, and with selling liquor contrary to the “Five Gallon Act,” for which different penalties were provided.
    
      Abstract of the Decision.
    1. Intoxicating liquors, § 119
      
      —when single offense charged in indictment. But a single offense is charged by an indictment alleging that the defendant, in the county of Christian on a certain day, “not then and there having a legal license to keep a dramshop, unlawfully did [in violation of sec. 16, ch. 43, Hurd’s Rev. St., J. & A H 4619] then and there sell intoxicating liquor in less quantities than five gallons, and not in the original package as put up by the manufacturers, the said place where said intoxicating liquors were so sold not being within the incorporated limits of any city, town or village.”
    2. Intoxicating liquors, § 161*—when cumulative sentence to imprisonment not excessive. A cumulative sentence to imprisonment for three hundred days on a conviction on ten counts for violating sec. 16, of ch. 43, Hurd’s Rev. St. (J. & A. f 4619), by selling without a license intoxicating liquor not in the original packages, in quantities of less than five gallons, outside of the in- ' corporated limits of any city, town or village, held not excessive.
    John E. Hogan, for plaintiff in error.
    Harry B. Hershey and W. B. McBride, for defendant in error.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Justice Scholfield

delivered the opinion of the

court.