Commonwealth v. Bryden
50 Mass. 137
Opinion
Enough is set forth in the indictment to constitute the offence of a single act of selling spiritous liquor without being duly licensed, if we strike out all that part which charges generally that the defendant, “ on divers days and times between the 1st day of January and the 1st Monday of May, was a retailer and seller of wine, rum, brandy and other spiritous liquor.” This, we think, may be stricken out, upon the authority of Commonwealth v. Pray, 13 Pick. 359, and The People v. Adams, 17 Wend. 475.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Commonwealth v. Bryden, 50 Mass. 137 (Mass. 1845).
50 Mass. 137 (Commonwealth v. Bryden) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Commonwealth v. Dingman
26 Pa. Super. 615 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1904)