¶1In this case the indictment is sufficient. It is true that the prohibition, and the definition of the of-fence, by the statute of 1858, section 10, are in the same section. But the provisions are in distinct and separate clauses, *218as much as in the statute of T856. In the case of State v. Casey, 45 Maine, 435, the word “ section” was used inadvertently in the opinion of the Court, owing, probably, to the fact that, in the statute then under consideration, the provisions were in distinct sections. But, whether in distinct sections, or clauses, can make no difference. The offence, like that of being a common seller of intoxicating liquors, is made sufficiently certain by the terms used in the enacting prohibitory clause.
48 Me. 217
State v. Collins
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Decided July 1, 1860
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · decided 1860-07-01
On Exceptions to the rulings of Davis, J. Indictment against the defendant, charging that the respondent, “ on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and fifty-nine, and on divers other days and times, between the first day of January aforesaid and the day of the finding of this indictment, at Portland aforesaid, in the county of Cumberland aforesaid, unlawfully did keep a drinking house and tippling shop, against the peace of said State…
Decided 1860-07-01