Commonwealth v. Worcestrr
| Decision Date | 31 January 1879 |
| Citation | 126 Mass. 256 |
| Parties | Commonwealth v. Albert W. Worcestrr |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Middlesex. Complaint on the Gen. Sts. c. 87, § 6 charging the defendant with keeping and maintaining a certain dwelling-house in Concord, used for the illegal sale and illegal keeping of intoxicating liquors, the same being a common nuisance.
At the trial in the Superior Court, before Allen J., the government called witnesses who testified that they went to the defendant's dwelling-house on two or three different occasions and had dinners or suppers; that with these meals and as part thereof, they had wine, lager beer and other liquors; and that when they got through they paid the defendant for the meal, each paying what he pleased, and they thought they paid two dollars each. The evidence did not show that there was any bar there, but that the table was spread and they had chowder, beef, chickens, &c., and the wine and beer bottles were on the table.
The defendant asked the judge to instruct the jury as follows: "If the jury find upon the evidence that the defendant kept the house described in the complaint as his dwelling-house, and that occasionally parties of young men resorted there for meals of victuals only, that would not constitute such house a nuisance within the meaning of the law, although the defendant furnished with such meals wine or other intoxicating liquors, if the parties simply paid for the meals so furnished, and no bar for the sale of liquor was kept on the premises, and no liquor was sold or furnished except as aforesaid with the meals."
The judge declined to give the instruction requested, but instructed the jury that, if meals were furnished, and, as part of such meals, intoxicating liquors were furnished, and the payment for the meals included payment for the liquors, that would constitute an illegal sale within the provisions of the statute.
The jury returned a verdict of guilty; and the defendant alleged exceptions.
Exceptions overruled.
I. S. Morse, for the defendant.
J. F. Brown, Assistant Attorney General, (C. R. Train, Attorney General, with him,) for the Commonwealth.
The instructions given by the presiding judge were correct. The purchase of a meal includes all the articles that go to make up the meal. It is wholly immaterial that no specific price is attached to those articles separately....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ennabe v. Manosa
...members and their guests a fee that entitled them to enter the club and to obtain "free" alcoholic beverages. Finally, in Commonwealth v. Worcester (1879) 126 Mass. 256, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts addressed a case involving a dwelling house that charged for meals that inclu......
-
Friend v. Childs Dining Hall Co.
...a restaurant and one who resorts there for food to be served and eaten on the premises is a sale of food. The evidence in Commonwealth v. Worcester, 126 Mass. 256, was that on two or three different occasions people resorted to the defendant's dwelling house and there were served with meals......
-
Friend v. Childs Dining Hall Co.
...a restaurant and one who resorts there for food to be served and eaten on the premises is a sale of food. The evidence in Commonwealth v. Worcester, 126 Mass. 256 , was that on two or three different occasions resorted to the defendant's dwelling house and there were served with meals; with......
-
Stanfield v. F.W. Woolworth Co.
...72 N.H. 396, 56 A. 918; Savage v. State, 50 Tex.Cr.R. 199, 88 S.W. 351; Scanlon v. City of Denver, 38 Colo. 401, 88 P. 156; Commonwealth v. Worcester, 126 Mass. 256; v. District of Columbia, 11 App. D.C. 453; Nicrosi v. State, 52 Ala. 336. Where there was a statute forbidding the sale of ad......