State v. Meagher
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Barry Circuit Court. — Eon. F. O. Johnston, Judge. Do not the very words of the statute (sec. 3011) show that it was the intention of the lawmakers to prohibit the open saloon and the sale of liquors therein during the progress of the election, so that the voters could exercise their right of suffrage free and clear of any influence that the saloon might bring to bear on them up until the polls were closed ? But what effect could the open saloon or the sale of…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Barry Circuit Court. — Eon. F. O. Johnston, Judge. Do not the very words of the statute (sec. 3011) show that it was the intention of the lawmakers to prohibit the open saloon and the sale of liquors therein during the progress of the election, so that the voters could exercise their right of suffrage free and clear of any influence that the saloon might bring to bear on them up until the polls were closed ? But what effect could the open saloon or the sale of liquors therein have on the election after the -polls were closed and the election over? Wooster v. State, 6 Baxt. (Tenn.)…
1Opinion of the CourtBland, P. J.
On information filed by the prosecuting attorney, defendant was convicted of a violation of section 3011, Revised Statutes 1899, which prohibits a licensed dramshop keeper from keeping his dramshop *335open on Sunday, or on any general election day. The facts are that November 8, 1904, was a day on which a general election was held in this State, and on said day defendant was a licensed dramshop- keeper, in the city of Monett, Barry county; that after the polls were closed on said day, in said city, at six o’clock p. m., defendant opened his dramshop for business and kept it open until a late…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Gayle v. Missouri Car & Foundry Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1903
- State v. LentzSupreme Court of Missouri · 1904
- Fox v. AbelSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1818
- Beatty v. ClarksonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1904
- Rose v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1899
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- City of Waxahachie v. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of TexasCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1916
- City of Waxahachie v. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of TexasCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1916