State v. . Norton

Supreme Court of North Carolina

State v. . Norton

24 N.C. 40

DecidedDecember 5, 1841

StatusPublished

This text of 24 N.C. 40 (State v. . Norton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. . Norton, 24 N.C. 40 (N.C. 1841).

Pincite

Opinion

Daniel., J.

Knowingly selling unwholesome provisions is a misdemeanor at the common law. State v Smith, 3 Hawks 378. 2 East’s P. C. 822. 1 Rus. on Crimes, 115. The Judge charged the Jury, that it was not necessary that the meat sold should be such as to produce sickness or death, when éaíeii, if it was' in such a state as to' render it unfit to' be eaten, according to the usages of a decent and Christian people'. We think that the charge Was too broad'. The gist of the' offence consists in' the knowingly selling for lucre; provisions, which may be' injurious to the health of those who are to consume them. To support this indictment, the meat sold must have been' in such a state, that, if eaten, it would, by its noxious', unwholesome, and deleterious quality) have affected the health of those Who'were'to have consumed it. Rex. v Dixon, 4 Camp. Rep. 12. The samé case before the Judges of the King’s Bench, 3 Maul, and Sel. 11. We are of the opinion that there must be a new trial.

Per Curia-m-, New trial awarded-,-

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

Daniel., J.

Knowingly selling unwholesome provisions is a misdemeanor at the common law. State v Smith, 3 Hawks 378. 2 East’s P. C. 822. 1 Rus. on Crimes, 115. The Judge charged the Jury, that it was not necessary that the meat sold should be such as to produce sickness or death, when éaíeii, if it was' in such a state as to' render it unfit to' be eaten, according to the usages of a decent and Christian people'. We think that the charge Was too broad'. The gist of the' offence consists in' the knowingly selling for lucre; provisions, which may be' injurious to the health of those who are to consume them. To support this indictment, the meat sold must have been' in such a state, that, if eaten, it would, by its noxious', unwholesome, and deleterious quality) have affected the health of those Who'were'to have consumed it. Rex. v Dixon, 4 Camp. Rep. 12. The samé case before the Judges of the King’s Bench, 3 Maul, and Sel. 11. We are of the opinion that there must be a new trial.

Per Curia-m-, New trial awarded-,-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 N.C. 40, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-norton-nc-1841.