Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

24 Wis. 60

State v. Hartfiel

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 15, 1869

Wisconsin Supreme Court · decided 1869-02-15

CERTIFIED from tRe Circuit Court for Vernon County. Hartfiel was indicted for selling spirituous liquors to one Pennell, a minor, in violation of cRapter 36, Laws of 1866, and cRapter 128, Laws of 1867. TRe evidence for tRe prosecution sRowed tRat Re inquired of Pennell, before letting Rim Rave tRe liquor, wRetRer Re was of age, and received an answer in tRe affirmative, and also sRowed tRat Pennell was six feet and one incR in ReigRt.

Relies on Barnes v. State · Dearborn v. Inhabitants of Brookline

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1869-02-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently November 1985 · most notably People v. Roby (1884), McCutcheon v. People (1873)

1 federal appellate · 40 state decisions — followed in 16 states

901869187018801890190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 →

Dixow, C. J.

¶1The authorities cited by the assistant attoney general seem to leave no doubt as to the disposition which ought to be made of this case. The words “knowingly” or “willfully,” or other words of equivalent import, are omitted from the statute, and the offense is made to consist solely in the fact of a sale of intoxicating liquors or drinks to a minor. Laws of 1867, ch. 128, § 1. The authorities cited are to the effect that, where a statute commands that an act be done or omitted, which, in the absence of such statute, might have been done or omitted without culpability, ignorance of the fact, or state of things contemplated by the statute, will not excuse its violation. 3 Greenl. Ev. § 21; Barnes v. The State, 19 Conn. 398; Commonwealth v. Marsh, 7 Met. 472; Commonwealth v. Boynton, 2 Allen, 160; Commonwealth v. Barren, 9 id. 489; Commonwealth v. Waite, 11 id. 264; Commonwealth v. Raymond, 97 Mass. 467; Commonwealth v. Elwell, 2 Met. 190.

¶2Of this nature, as observed by Professor GpjseNxeab, are many fiscal, police and other laws and regulations, for the mere violation of which, irrespective of the motives or knowledge of the party, certain penalties are enacted : *62for the law, in these cases, seems to bind the party to know the facts, and to obey the law at his peril. The act in question is a police regulation, and we have no doubt that the legislature intended to inflict the penalty, irrespective of the knowledge or motives of the person who has violated its provisions. Indeed, if this were not so, it is plain that the statute might be violated times without number, with no possibility of convicting offenders, and so it would become a dead letter on the statute book, and the evil aimed at by the legislature remain almost wholly untouched. To guard against such results, the legislature has, Jn effect, provided that the saloon keeper, or other vendór of intoxicating liquors or drinks, must know the facts — must know that the person to .whom he sells is a qualified drinlcer, within the meaning of the statute ; and, if not, he acts at his peril in disobeying the requirements of the law.

¶3By the Court — -We answer that there was no error in the instruction given to the jury upon the point in question, and for an opinion upon which the cause has been certified up to this court; and we advise the circuit court to proceed to render such judgment as the law requires.

/24/wis/60 · .json · Public domain