Case ID: mass_121/html/0374-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "By the Court.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Commonwealth vs. James Dolan.
    Suffolk.-
    Nov. 27. —
    Dec. 2, 1876.
    Colt & Ames, JJ., absent.
    Under the St. of 1875, c. 99, the exposing and keeping for sale intoxicating liquor* constitutes but one offence, and a complaint charging both is good, and is supported by proof of either.
    Complaint under the St. of 1875, c. 99, to the Municipal Court of the West Roxbury District, charging that the defendant, at a time and place named, “ unlawfully did expose and keep for sale intoxicating liquors, with intent unlawfully to sell the same in this Commonwealth.”
    At the trial in the Superior Court, before Putnam, J., on appeal, the witnesses for the government testified that they found a bar inside of the defendant’s saloon, a beer-pump, table, shelves, bottles and tumblers; and, behind the bar, a jug containing a gallon of whiskey; and, in the cellar, a barrel of ale, connected by a pipe with another pump on the bar.
    The defendant contended that there was no evidence sustaining the allegation of exposing the liquors; and asked the judge to instruct the jury, that they must find both a keeping and exposing in order to convict; and that to keep intoxicating liquors for sale without exposing them was not a criminal offence under the statute; and, if it was, that it was not properly charged in the complaint. The judge refused to give these instructions, but instructed the jury that it was sufficient if they found that the defendant kept the liquors for sale unlawfully.
    The jury returned a verdict of guilty; and the defendant alleged exceptions.
    
      T. Riley, for the defendant.
    
      O. R. Train, Attorney General, for the Commonwealth.
   By the Court.

Whether the defendant exposes or keeps for sale, or both keeps and exposes, it is but one offence; and a complaint charging both is good, and is supported by proof of either. Exceptions overruled.