Case Name: Commonwealth vs. James Meskill
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Jurisdiction: Massachusetts
Decision Date: 1896-01-03
Citations: 165 Mass. 142
Docket Number: 
Parties: Commonwealth vs. James Meskill.
Judges: 
Reporter: Massachusetts Reports
Volume: 165
Pages: 142–143

Head Matter:
Commonwealth vs. James Meskill.
Middlesex.
November 25, 1895. —
January 3, 1896.
Present: Field, C. J., Allen, Holmes, Kno wl ton, & Lathrop, JJ.
Intoxicating Liquors— Conviction without Proof of Sale.
One may be convicted of unlawfully keeping intoxicating liquor for sale without proof that he actually sold any liquor, or offered or exposed it for sale.
Complaint, charging the defendant with unlawfully keeping intoxicating liquor with intent unlawfully to sell the same at Maynard, on December 81, 1894.
At the trial in the Superior Court, before Bond, J., there was evidence tending to show that, on the evening of December 31, one of the police officers who visited the premises with a search-warrant, found the defendant with a bottle containing whiskey in his hand and a person standing beside him holding a tumbler; that after a struggle with one Matthews, to whom the defendant handed the bottle, the officer took it; that while there was no bar in the room, there were four jugs, two of which smelled of whiskey, and glasses which smelled of or were wet with whiskey; that in the stable were five ten-gallon kegs smelling of whiskey, and that on several occasions in July and August men who entered the premises sober afterwards came out drank.
The defendant introduced evidence tending to show that the bottle was brought to the place by Matthews, and belonged to him; that the defendant, Matthews, and a friend had had two or three drinks each out of the bottle, and had used glasses belonging to the defendant; that he hired the premises of one Farrell, and did not live there; that he kept no intoxicating liquors, but sold sweet beer, cigars, etc.; and that some of the jugs had contained vinegar, but none of them had ever contained whiskey.
The defendant requested the judge to rule that the defendant could not be convicted of unlawfully keeping intoxicating liquor for sale unless there was some evidence that he actually sold it, or offered or exposed it for sale.
The judge refused so to rule; the jury returned a verdict of guilty; and the defendant alleged exceptions.
T. Hillis, for the defendant.
G. A. Sanderson, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth.

Opinion:
Allen, J.
One may be convicted of unlawfully keeping intoxicating liquor for sale without proof that he actually sold any liquor, or offered or exposed it for sale. Commonwealth v. Tay, 146 Mass. 146. Commonwealth v. Welch, 140 Mass. 372. Commonwealth v. Atkins, 136 Mass. 160. Commonwealth v. McCue, 121 Mass. 358.
¡Exceptions overruled.