Commonwealth v. Gillon
This text of 18 N.E. 584 (Commonwealth v. Gillon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The only alleged defect in the complaint which could be called substantial, if it were a defect, is that there is no allegation “ of any intent illegally to sell said intoxicating liquors within the Dorchester district,” but the allegation is of an “intent unlawfully to sell the same in this Commonwealth.” The unlawful keeping of intoxicating liquors for sale is equally an offence, whether the intent is unlawfully to sell them at the place where they are kept, or at other places in the Commonwealth.
The testimony of Perry, that he saw in the kitchen “ seven men, five sitting around a table and two standing up,” and “the wife of the defendant having two bottles of what he called lager beer under her apron, and that he took one from her, and the other she broke over the stove,” was competent. Commonwealth v. Locke, 145 Mass. 401. Commonwealth v. McHugh, 147 Mass. 401. Commonwealth v. Downey, ante, p. 14.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
18 N.E. 584, 148 Mass. 15, 1888 Mass. LEXIS 6, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-gillon-mass-1888.