Commonwealth v. Levy
This text of 126 Mass. 240 (Commonwealth v. Levy) 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 possession of intoxicating liquors, even of various kinds and in large quantities, is not of itself, and if that were the only fact proved, sufficient to justify a verdict of guilty, in a complaint like that now under consideration. But the evidence reported in this bill of exceptions goes beyond this limit. It was not only proved that barrels of ale had been upon the premises, and that one was on tap there, when the officers entered; but a part of the furniture of the establishment, — the tumblers, the strainer, and especially the apparatus of the beer-pump,— was appropriate to a shop or place of public resort where intoxicating liquors are kept for sale, and furnished an indication of an intent to sell, rather than to apply to the mere domestic use of a single family All this the jury had a right to consider. It is impossible for us to say that it had no weight or significance, or that there was no evidence to justify their verdict.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
126 Mass. 240, 1879 Mass. LEXIS 220, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-levy-mass-1879.