Opinion · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Commonwealth v. Merriam

136 Mass. 433

Type
Opinion
Court
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Jurisdiction
Massachusetts
Date
1884-01-30
Topic
bankruptcy

Colburn, J. In order to justify sales of intoxicating liquors, it was incumbent on the defendant to produce a license which upon its face appeared to be valid. Section 5 of the Pub. Sts. c. 100, requires that the license shall set forth “ the building in which the business is to be carried on.” We are of opinion that the license produced in this case was defective in not setting forth such building, and that it is immaterial that the defect was the fault of the selectmen. It was still a defective license, under which the defendant could not justify.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Commonwealth v. Merriam. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
3 opinions
Colburn, J.

In order to justify sales of intoxicating liquors, it was incumbent on the defendant to produce a license which upon its face appeared to be valid. Section 5 of the Pub. Sts. c. 100, requires that the license shall set forth “ the building in which the business is to be carried on.”

We are of opinion that the license produced in this case was defective in not setting forth such building, and that it is immaterial that the defect was the fault of the selectmen. It was still a defective license, under which the defendant could not justify.

We are of opinion that the certificate made upon the face of the license, under date of September 21, 1882, evidenced only by the signature of the clerk of the board of selectmen, was of no effect. What effect this certificate would have had if it had been properly authenticated, we do not find it necessary to determine ; as we are of opinion that, in order that it should have any effect, it must have been authenticated by the signatures of the chairman of the selectmen and the town clerk, as required for the original license.

Exceptions overruled.