Clarke v. State
Supreme Court of Alabama
Novel and difficult question from the Circuit Court of Pickens. Samuel Clark was indicted for playing at cards, in a public place. The evidence was, that the playing took place in the office of a physician, where he exhibited his medicines, received professional calls at all times, and being an unmarried man, where he also ate, and slept. The playing was at night, with closed doors : only a few friends were present, by invitation.
Read the full summary
Novel and difficult question from the Circuit Court of Pickens. Samuel Clark was indicted for playing at cards, in a public place. The evidence was, that the playing took place in the office of a physician, where he exhibited his medicines, received professional calls at all times, and being an unmarried man, where he also ate, and slept. The playing was at night, with closed doors : only a few friends were present, by invitation. The court held this was a public place, within the meaning of the statute, but reserved the question as one of novelty and difficulty.
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
I incline to the opinion, that the evidence described such a public place, as is within the meaning of the act. The terms, “ or any other public place,” employed in the statute, were designed by the legislature to include every place, where people are privileged to go without an invitation ; or in other words, if it is not a private house, it is a public place ; although, no doubt even a private house might become a public place, if upon a particular occasion, a general invitation was given to the publie to meet there. The mischief designed to be prevented, was the exposure of the practice of…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Burdine v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1854
- Mills v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1852
- Windham v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1855
- Campbell v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1850
- Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1887
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.