State v. Hitchcock

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

State v. Hitchcock

44 A. 296, 68 N.H. 244

DecidedDecember 5, 1894

StatusPublished

This text of 44 A. 296 (State v. Hitchcock) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Hitchcock, 44 A. 296, 68 N.H. 244 (N.H. 1894).

Pincite

Opinion

Wallace, J.

The question at issue was whether the defendant kept spirituous liquor for sale illegally. On that question it was proper for him to show that the liquor he was charged with keeping for sale was kept by him as a pharmacist in compounding medicines. But his offer to introduce in evidence hand-bills, as samples of those distributed by him in advertising certain medicines, was properly rejected, in the absence of any evidence or the offer of any evidence to show that liquor was used in compounding those medicines.

jExceptions overruled.

Clark, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Wallace, J.

The question at issue was whether the defendant kept spirituous liquor for sale illegally. On that question it was proper for him to show that the liquor he was charged with keeping for sale was kept by him as a pharmacist in compounding medicines. But his offer to introduce in evidence hand-bills, as samples of those distributed by him in advertising certain medicines, was properly rejected, in the absence of any evidence or the offer of any evidence to show that liquor was used in compounding those medicines.

jExceptions overruled.

Clark, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

44 A. 296, 68 N.H. 244, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hitchcock-nh-1894.