State v. Gambrill

• Court: Court of Appeals of Maryland
• Writing for the Court: BRISCOE, J.
• Citation: 115 Md. 506,81 A. 10
• Parties: STATE v. GAMBRILL.
• Decision Date: 19 April 1911

81 A. 10
115 Md. 506

STATE
v.
GAMBRILL.

Court of Appeals of Maryland.

April 19, 1911.

Appeal from the Criminal Court of Baltimore City.

George T. Gambrill was indicted for unlawfully issuing a warehouse receipt without destroying an outstanding receipt. From a judgment sustaining a demurrer to the indictment, the State appeals. Affirmed.

Argued before BOYD, C. J., and BRISCOE, PEARCE, PATTISON, and URNER, JJ.

Emory L. Stinchcomb and Isaac Lobe Straus, Atty. Gen., for the State.

Clifton S. Brown and George Whitelock, for appellee.

BRISCOE, J. The appellee was indicted on the 5th day of May, 1910, in the criminal court of Baltimore city for the alleged violation of section 194 of article 27 of the Code of Public General Laws of 1904, entitled, "Crimes and Punishments." The indictment, in substance, alleges that the traverser on the 27th day of August, in the year 1908, being an agent and officer of the Roxbury Distilling Company, a corporation, unlawfully did willfully issue a certain receipt of the said corporation, dated the 27th day of August, 1908, numbered 335, to a certain person unknown, for 125 barrels of rye whisky, being on deposit, and under the control of the said corporation, without, before the issuance of the receipt, having canceled and destroyed a certain other receipt, then outstanding, for the same number of barrels of whisky previously issued on the 17th day of June, in the year 1907, to the order of the Citizens' National Bank of Baltimore, contrary to the form of the act of assembly in such case made and provided, etc.

The material part of the section of the Code upon which the indictment rests is as follows: "No warehouseman or corporation or person whatsoever having issued or caused

81 A. 11

to be issued or having outstanding and issued by an agent or officer of such person or corporation as aforesaid any receipt, acceptance of order or other voucher for goods, chattels or commodities as on deposit or the control of such person or corporation shall issue any other receipt, acceptance of order or other voucher whatsoever for the same, or any part thereof, until the said first issued instrument shall have been returned and canceled or destroyed; and no person or corporation whatsoever having issued or having outstanding, as aforesaid, any such receipt, acceptance of order or other voucher aforesaid, and no agent or officer of any such person or corporation shall part with, deliver or remove or permit to be delivered or removed the goods, chattels or commodities in such instrument named or described, or any part thereof, except only to or by the holder of said instrument, or upon his order, and upon the presentation of said instrument with his indorsement in every case, or without canceling or destroying said instrument in case of complete delivery or removal or indorsing thereon the quantity and description of the goods, chattels and commodities, delivered or removed, and the names of the persons to whom delivered, or by whom removed in case such delivery or removal shall be partial only; and any principal person or corporation or agent or officer of any person or corporation willfully violating this section or any of the provisions thereof shall be guilty of misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not less than one thousand nor more than five thousand dollars, and imprisonment in the penitentiary for a period of not less than one year, nor more than three years in the discretion of the court"

A demurrer to the indictment was sustained by the court below and a judgment entered thereon for the traverser. From the judgment thus entered, the state has taken this appeal.

It is contended upon the part of the traverser, first, that section 194 of article 27 of the Code has been repealed by chapters 336 and 406 of the Acts...