Ingersoll v. State

Prosecution against Daniel Ingersoll for misdemeanors.

The information contains two paragraphs — one charging that said Ingersoll kept a tippling-house in a riotous and disorderly manner, to the great annoyance of the neighborhood, &c.; the other, that he sold spirituous liquor by retail, without a license pursuant to the liquor act of 1853.

' The state elected to prosecute under the second paragraph. The defendant was convicted. The first paragraph contains a substantially good charge of a public nuisance at common law (The State v. Millikin, 8 Blackf. 260); and was sustainable under §§ 8, 9,…