The State v. Hamill

• Decision Date: 06 January 1908
• Citation: 106 S.W. 1103,127 Mo.App. 661
• Parties: THE STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent, v. PETER HAMILL, Appellant
• Court: Kansas Court of Appeals

106 S.W. 1103

127 Mo.App. 661

THE STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent, v. PETER HAMILL, Appellant

Court of Appeals of Missouri, Kansas City

January 6, 1908

Appeal from Nodaway Circuit Court.--Hon. William C. Ellison, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Judgment affirmed.

J. C Growney, for appellant, filed an argument.

John M Dawson, for respondent, filed no briefs.

OPINION

JOHNSON, J.

Defendant was indicted, tried, convicted and fined forty dollars under the provisions of section 2179, Revised Statutes 1899, for the offense of selling intoxicating liquors to a minor without the written permission of the parent, master or guardian of such minor first had and obtained. He offered to prove at the trial that he was a licensed dramshop keeper but the court rejected the evidence. He contends that a licensed dramshop keeper must be prosecuted for the offense in question under section 3009, Revised Statutes 1899, as amended in 1905, p. 141, and is not subject to prosecution under section 2179, which, he argues, was intended by the Legislature to apply only to persons other than licensed dramshop keepers.

Section 3009 was enacted in 1891 (Session Acts 1891, section 19, p 131), and until its amendment in 1905, provided that "every dramshop keeper, or any other person, who shall sell, give away, or otherwise dispose of, or suffer the same to be done about his premises, any intoxicating liquor in any quantity to any minor, without the written permission of the parent, master or guardian of such minor first had and obtained . . . shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and be punished by a fine of not less than fifty dollars nor more than two hundred dollars." In Bachman v. Brown, 57 Mo.App. 68, decided by the St. Louis Court of Appeals in 1894, it was held that the words "any other person" as used in the statute referred to "any-one representing a dramshop keeper, or who may be temporarily in charge of his business when such an offense is committed," and did not include a merchant, or druggist who might sell intoxicating liquors to a minor. In 1897 the Legislature, moved, no doubt, by that decision, enacted the statute now appearing as section 2179 which declares "any person who shall directly or indirectly sell, give away, or otherwise dispose of or furnish or deliver any intoxicating liquor in any quantity to any minor without the written permission of the parent, master or guardian of such minor first had and obtained, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on conviction, shall be fined not less than forty dollars nor more than two hundred dollars." Clearly it was the legislative intent to bring within the operation of this statute any person, whether merchant, druggist, dramshop keeper or bartender,...