Reports of Cases Determined By the Supreme Court of the State of ..., volume 261
Reports of Cases Determined By the Supreme Court of the State of ..., volume 261
Missouri. Supreme Court
The book Reports of Cases Determined By the Supreme Court of the State of ..., volume 261 was written by author Missouri. Supreme Court Here you can read free online of Reports of Cases Determined By the Supreme Court of the State of ..., volume 261 book, rate and share your impressions in comments. If you don't know what to write, just answer the question: Why is Reports of Cases Determined By the Supreme Court of the State of ..., volume 261 a good or bad book?
What reading level is Reports of Cases Determined By the Supreme Court of the State of ..., volume 261 book?
To quickly assess the difficulty of the text, read a short excerpt:
United States, 220 U. S. 575; Thomley v. U. S., 113 U. S. 313; U. S. v. Chase, 135 U. S. 262; Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U. S. 558; Hawaii, ManHchi, 190 U. S. 247; Bank v. Parker, 192 U. S. 80; New Jersey v. Anderson, 203 U. S. 490; Rail- road V. Cotton Oil Co., 204 U. S. 447; Railroad v. Ar- kansas, 219 U. S. 465. ROY, C. — ^This is a prosecution under the Act of April 7, 1911 (Laws 1911, page 261), prohibiting the Adulteration of adulteration of non-alcoholic drinks by Drinkt-^*'^"^ the use of s...accharin and other sub- Saccharin: stances therein named. Defendant was unconstitutional ^^.^i^ted and has appealed. It is Digitized by VjOOQlC VOL. 261, APRIL TERM, 1914. 303 " I — ■ State ▼. Bottling Co. charged in the information that defendant sold ''an article of food, ready for consumption, being a non-alcoholic drink, to-wit, soda water, which was then and there filled into a bottle containing about one pint, and which was then and there adulterated in this, to-wit, by having a foreign substance added there- to, to-wit, saccharin/* Defendant moved to quash the indictment because that part of the act prohibiting the use of saccharin is not within the title of the act, and is, therefore, con- trary to section 28 of article 4 of our State Constitu- tion, and also because the act is class legislation con- trary to subdivision 26 of section 52 of article 4 of that Constitution, and also because it abridges the privi- leges and immunities of this defendant and denies to this defendant the equal protection of the laws, con- trary to section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
User Reviews: