Commonwealth v. Gordon

Decided April 5, 1893

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1893-04-05

Adulterated Milk — Statute — Inference of Fact by Jury. A complaint under Pub. Sts. c. 57, § 5, charging the defendant with having in his possession, with intent to sell, milk to which a foreign substance had been added, is sustained by proof of possession, with that intent, of cream to which boracic acid had been added. A complaint under Pub. Sts. c. 57, § 5, charging the defendant with having in his possession, with intent to sell, milk to which a foreign substance had been added, was heard on an “ agreed statement of facts,” which was not a case stated in writing and filed, but an admission of facts from which the jury were at liberty to draw inferences. Held, that the jury might infer the offence charged from a sale by the defendant from his restaurant.

Relies on Old Colony Railroad v. Wilder · Commonwealth v. Tobias

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1893-04-05

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently March 1943

1 federal appellate · 7 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 →

Holmes, J.

¶1The word “ milk,” in Pub. Sts. c. 57, “ Of the inspection and sale of milk,” is shown by § 7 to include milk from which no part of the cream has been removed, and we are of opinion that it is used as a general name and in a sense broad enough to include cream. The offence under § 5, of having in one’s possession, with intent to sell, milk to which *9a foreign substance has been added, is committed by having, with that intent, cream to which boracic acid has been added. This was the only point argued for the defence.

¶2We understand that the so called agreed statement of facts was not a case stated in writing and filed, but simply an admission of facts from which the jury were at liberty to draw inferences without encountering Old Colony Railroad v. Wilder, 137 Mass. 536, 538. This being so, they might infer the offence charged from the sale by the defendant from his restaurant. Commonwealth v. Tobias, 141 Mass. 129, 135.

¶3 Exceptions overruled.