People v. Miller
Michigan Supreme Court
Exceptions before judgment from Ingham; Wiest, J. Michael Miller was convicted of violating section 1 of Act No. 63, Pub. Acts 1913. Respondent was informed against, charged with violating section 1, Act No. 63, Pub. Acts 1913 (2 Comp.
Read the full summary
Exceptions before judgment from Ingham; Wiest, J. Michael Miller was convicted of violating section 1 of Act No. 63, Pub. Acts 1913. Respondent was informed against, charged with violating section 1, Act No. 63, Pub. Acts 1913 (2 Comp. Laws 1915, § 6395), which provides: “No person shall sell, expose or offer for sale or exchange, or have in his possession with intent to sell or exchange, any oleomargarine or other substance made in imitation of butter, and which is intended to be used as a substitute for butter, unless each and every vessel, package, roll or parcel of such substance has…
1Opinion of the CourtOstrander, C. J.
(after stating the facts). Respondent is charged with having in his possession and with selling, not stamped, “a certain mixture commonly known as oleomargarine.” The proof is that he sold a substance, not butter, but a substitute for it, artificially colored with annotta to give it a yellow color.
Section 6 of said Act No. 63 reads as follows:
“For the purpose of this act certain manufactured substances, certain extracts and certain mixtures and *600compounds, including such mixtures and compounds with butter, shall be known and designated as ‘oleomargarine,’ namely: All substances heretofore…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bennett v. CarrMichigan Supreme Court · 1903
- Jasnowski v. Judge of the Recorder's CourtMichigan Supreme Court · 1917