State v. Campbell
Supreme Court of Rhode Island
EXCEPTIONS to the Court of Common Pleas. This case was a complaint and warrant before the Justice Court of Providence, charging that on the 29th day of May, A. D. 1877, with force and arms, “ Louise Campbell, of said Providence, laborer, not being then and there a registered pharmacist, or registered assistant pharmacist in the employ of a registered pharmacist, and not acting as aid under the immediate supervision of a registered pharmacist or registered assistant…
Read the full summary
EXCEPTIONS to the Court of Common Pleas. This case was a complaint and warrant before the Justice Court of Providence, charging that on the 29th day of May, A. D. 1877, with force and arms, “ Louise Campbell, of said Providence, laborer, not being then and there a registered pharmacist, or registered assistant pharmacist in the employ of a registered pharmacist, and not acting as aid under the immediate supervision of a registered pharmacist or registered assistant pharmacist, and not being then and there a practitioner of medicine, who did not keep open shop for the retailing, dispensing,…
1Opinion of the CourtDureee, C. J.
We think tbe first exception must be sustained. An allegation that tbe defendant did “ keep and suffer to be kept on her premises, and under her charge, for the purpose of sale and not for the purpose of exportation, ale, wine, rum,” &c., must be construed to mean that the liquors were kept and suffered to be kept for sale, and not kept or suffered to be kept for exportation, and it is not equivalent to an allegation that they were kept for sale and not for sale for exportation. It does not preclude the possibility that the defendant may have kept them, or suffered them to be kept for sale…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1875