State v. Powers
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Information for keeping a disorderly house, under the 137th section of the “ act concerning crimes and punishments,” brought to the Superior Court in New London county and tried to the jury before Loomis, J. On the trial the attorney for the state offered evidence to prove that the defendant kept certain rooms on the first floor of a two story building, in the town of Stonington, for the sale of liquors, groceries and confectionery, and that lewd, dissolute and drunken…
Read the full summary
Information for keeping a disorderly house, under the 137th section of the “ act concerning crimes and punishments,” brought to the Superior Court in New London county and tried to the jury before Loomis, J. On the trial the attorney for the state offered evidence to prove that the defendant kept certain rooms on the first floor of a two story building, in the town of Stonington, for the sale of liquors, groceries and confectionery, and that lewd, dissolute and drunken persons were accustomed to resort to the rooms with his knowledge and consent, and that carousing and fighting were permitted…
1Opinion of the CourtPark, J.
We fully agree with the counsel for the defendant, that penal statutes are to be construed strictly; but this rule is not violated by permitting the words of a statute to have their full meaning. The letter of remedial statutes may be extended to include cases clearly within the mischief the statute was intended to remedy, unless such construction does violence to the language used; but a consideration of the old law, the misehief, and the remedy, are not enough to bring cases within the purview of penal statutes. They must be expressly included by the words of the statute. This is all the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Rawson v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1848
3Cited by2 opinions
- Bassett v. PepeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1920
- Ingersoll v. IngersollNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1882