Source: United States District Court for the District of Columbia
Date: 1801-12-01
Jurisdiction: United States
Citation: 1 Cranch 44 · 1 D.C. 44
Opinion
The Court directed the jury that if they should be of opinion that the defendant sold the liquor as clerk, agent, servant, or barkeeper of Brown, then he was not guilty. It was the selling of Brown within the meaning of the act. See also post, United States v. Shuck, Alexandria, January term, 1802, (p. 56,) and United Stales v. Voss.