Commonwealth v. Economy Grocery Stores Corp.

• Decision Date: 26 January 1943
• Citation: Commonwealth v. Economy Grocery Stores Corp., 313 Mass. 70, 46 N.E.2d 521 (Mass. 1943)
• Parties: COMMONWEALTH v. ECONOMY GROCERY STORES CORPORATION.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

313 Mass. 70

46 N.E.2d 521

COMMONWEALTH

v.ECONOMY GROCERY STORES CORPORATION.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Essex.

Jan. 26, 1943.

Exceptions from Superior Court, Essex County; J. M. Hurley, Judge.

The Economy Grocery Stores Corporation was charged with selling for food certain decayed and unwholesome hamburger.The defendant's motion to quash the complaint was denied, and the defendant brings exceptions.

Exceptions overruled.

Before FIELD, C. J., and DONAHUE, LUMMUS, DOLAN, and COX, JJ.

J. J. Ryan, Jr., Asst. Dist. Atty., of Haverhill, for Commonwealth.

J. F. Cusick, of Boston, for defendant.

LUMMUS, Justice.

This is a complaint under G.L.(Ter.Ed.)c. 94, § 150, alleging that the defendant‘did sell * * * for food certain tainted, corrupt, decayed and unwholesome hamburg, said hamburg not being then and there packed in such a container that upon reasonable inspection the condition of the contents thereof could not be ascertained, without making the condition of said hamburg fully known to’ the buyer.The defendant moved to quash the complaint on the ground that it failed to allege that the defendant had knowledge that the hamburg was decayed or unwholesome.The trial judge denied the motion, and the defendant excepted.

The relevant statute originated in St. 1784, c. 50.Under that statutea defendant, to be guilty, must have sold the provisions ‘knowing the same’ to be unwholesome.In Hemmenway v. Woods, 1 Pick. 524, 526, this court said that the ‘St.1784, c. 50, against selling unwholesome provisions, requires a knowledge on the part of the vender, which would not be inferred from the mere fact that the provisions were unwholesome.’In Rev.Sts.1836, c. 131, § 1, the language was changed to require the defendant‘knowingly’ to sell the unwholesome provisions.But the meaning remainedthe same.Commonwealth v. Boynton, 12 Cush. 499. Gen.Sts.1860, c. 166, § 1. Pub.Sts.1882, c. 58, § 5. R.L.1902, c. 56, § 73.

By St.1913, c. 687, the statute was redrafted into substantially the present form, and the word ‘knowingly’ was omitted.We think the intention was to punish the sale of unwholesome provisions, subject to the statutory exception, without regard to the question whether the seller knew the provisions to be unwholesome or not.The statute was thus interpreted, correctly as we think, in Holt v. Mann, 294 Mass. 21, 24, 200 N.E. 403, andSchuler v. Union News Co., 295 Mass. 350, 354, 355, 4 N.E.2d 465.After the amendment of 19...