Dixon v. Corporation of Washington
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia
Appeal from six judgments of a justice of the peace, upon six warrants for $50 each, for the penalty of the by-law of the 12th of June, 1830, for keeping a faro-table, on six consecutive days. The warrants were all issued on the 6th of October,, 1830. The first was for keeping the faro-table on the 7lh of September, 1830. The second for keeping it on the 8th of September. The third for keeping it on the 9th, &c.
Read the full summary
Appeal from six judgments of a justice of the peace, upon six warrants for $50 each, for the penalty of the by-law of the 12th of June, 1830, for keeping a faro-table, on six consecutive days. The warrants were all issued on the 6th of October,, 1830. The first was for keeping the faro-table on the 7lh of September, 1830. The second for keeping it on the 8th of September. The third for keeping it on the 9th, &c. The words of the by-law are — “ No E. O.,” “ Faro,” &e., “ table or other device,” &c., shall be set up, kept, or exhibited, in any part of this city, under a penalty of fifty dollars…
1Opinion of the CourtCRanch, C. J.
(Thruston, J., absent.) .
In this case, we are of opinion that the keeping of a faro-table, contrary to the by-law of the Corporation of Washington of June 12th, 1830, is a single offence, although continued from day to day for many days, and that the amount of the penalty is to be regulated by the number of the days, reckoning $50 for each day. That all the keeping, previous to the issuing of the warrant, constitutes but one offence, and therefore that the day, charged in the warrant, is immaterial, so that the time, actually proved, be subsequent to a former prosecution, (if there has been…
2Cited by4 opinions
- People v. SullivanUtah Supreme Court · 1893
- Lane v. City of SpringfieldAppellate Court of Illinois · 1905
- Ex parte BennettU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia · 1852
- People v. SullivanUtah Supreme Court · 1893