Bond v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Sebastian Circuit Court, Fort Smith District. The charge ag'ainst appellant was unlawfully selling intoxicating liquors. The proof shows and the court found that Pale Malt Tonic was not intoxicating, and defendant should have been acquitted. Citing and reviewing Cooley, Const.' Dim. p. 79; 21 N. Y. 177; Bish.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Sebastian Circuit Court, Fort Smith District. The charge ag'ainst appellant was unlawfully selling intoxicating liquors. The proof shows and the court found that Pale Malt Tonic was not intoxicating, and defendant should have been acquitted. Citing and reviewing Cooley, Const.' Dim. p. 79; 21 N. Y. 177; Bish. St. Cr. sec.' 985; 36 Árk. 258; 39 id. 450; 50 id. 18 ; 39 id. 204; 51 id. 165. The object of the law was to prevent the sale of intoxicating liquors, compounds and preparations, and not to prohibit non-intoxicating beverages. Pale Malt Tonic is a malt liquor, the sale of…
1Opinion of the CourtHughes, J.
Upon an affidavit filed before a justice of the peace, charging him with the offense of selling intoxicating liquor without license, the appellant was arrested and brought before the justice of the peace to answer said charge. He pleaded not guilty, and was fined two hundred dollars, and appealed to this court.
The testimony was that the defendant sold a preparation called Pale Malt Tonic. The court sitting as a jury found the facts to be “ that Pale Malt Tonic is prepared to be sold for use and drink as a beverage, and as a substitute for heavier drinks like beer and whiskies; that, in color,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Molen v. OrrSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1884
3Cited by3 opinions
- Bradshaw v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Whitley v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1919
- State v. KlasnerNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1914