Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Kimball

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided November 7, 1837PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Indictment for retailing spirituous liquors in quantities less than twenty-eight gallons, contrary to Revised Stat. c. 47, § 3. Trial in the Common Pleas, before Williams J. It was admitted, that no person was licensed to retail spirit in the county of Essex. The persons named in the indictment as purchasers of the spirit, were called to testify to their alleged purchases.

Read the full summary

Indictment for retailing spirituous liquors in quantities less than twenty-eight gallons, contrary to Revised Stat. c. 47, § 3. Trial in the Common Pleas, before Williams J. It was admitted, that no person was licensed to retail spirit in the county of Essex. The persons named in the indictment as purchasers of the spirit, were called to testify to their alleged purchases. It was objected in their behalf, by the counsel for the defendant, that they could not be compelled to answer the question, whether they had bought spirit of any one, because their answer might lend to disgrace and bring…

1Opinion of the Court

Shaw C. J.

afterward drew up the opinion of the Court. This case comes before us upon numerous exceptions, taken to the opinions and directions of the Court of Common Pleas

The first exception taken was, that certain witnesses were called and questioned whether they had purchased spirituous liquors of the defendant, and though the question was objected to, they were required to answer it. It was objected to, on the ground that the answer would tend to subject the witnesses to a criminal prosecution, and to bring them into disgrace.

*369Wí,- think it must be understood from the bill of exceptions,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Bridge v. EgglestonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1817

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Nance v. Southern RailwaySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  2. Welty v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1912
  3. H. O. Canfield Co. v. United Construction WorkersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1948
  4. Nance v. Southern RailwaySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API