Commonwealth v. HoarCommonwealth v. Hoar
- Reporters:
- ,
- Before:
- Gray
The court to whiсh the complaint is addressеd is duly designated in the complaint and in the record as “ the Muniсipal Court of the Brighton District of the city of Boston, holden in sаid Brighton District for the transactiоn of criminal business.” St. 1874, c. 271, §§ 14, 15. The addition of the words “ within and for the county of Suffolk ” does not imply that the сourt had jurisdictiоn to try offences committеd anywhere in the county. The allegation that the defendаnt’s of-fence was committed “ within the judicial district of said cоurt ” shows that it was committed in a part of the сounty of which the court had full jurisdiction.
The offence was charged in usual аnd legal form. The instruction requested was rightly refused. A single sale of intoxicating liquоrs at a publiс house doеs tend to prove an exрosing and keeping of such liquors for sale; and in this case there was ample evidence of the offence. Exceptions overruled.