¶1It was found by the jury that, while no money passed or was to pass for the beer delivered by the defendant, it was delivered upon an agreement, express or implied, that other beer would be returned in payment for it. The intention *394of the Legislature in forbidding the sale of intoxicating liquors was to cover every transfer of them for value, in whatever form the consideration for such transfer was to be given or paid. The ruling that such a delivery as that found by the jury to have been ■ made was a sale, was therefore correct, and was in accordance with the previous decisions of this court. Mason v. Lothrop, 7 Gray, 354. Commonwealth v. Burns, 8 Gray, 482. Commonwealth v. Clark, 14 Gray, 367. Howard v. Harris, 8 Allen, 297. Exceptions overruled.
150 Mass. 393
Commonwealth v. Abrams
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided January 1, 1890
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1890-01-01
Complaint for an unlawful sale of intoxicating liquors to Morris Wolf, on Sunday, May 19,1889.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1890-01-01
How this case has been cited
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently May 1916
3 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →