Harland v. Adams

Mississippi Supreme Court
Harland v. Adams, 76 Miss. 308 (Miss. 1898)
Whitfield

Harland v. Adams

Opinion of the Court

Whitfield, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The sales of hoppenweis, hop tea, and white hops, in this case, were made in 1896, after the passage of the act of 1896, ch. 35, went into effect. The provisions of that act touching such sales (see p. 39 and § 2, p. 50), must be read as written into the body of § 1574 of the code of 1892, and so written in, they excepted those articles from the operation of the provisions of ch. 37 of the code of 1892, and left them, and the license for their sale to be dealt with under the said act of 1896.

It follows from this, that the judgment must be reversed and the suit dismissed.

Reference

Full Case Name
Edward C. Harland v. Wirt Adams, State Revenue Agt.
Status
Published
Syllabus
Dbamshops. Hoppenweis. Hop tea. WMte hops. Code 1892, chapter 37. Laws 1896, chapter 35, p. 39, and section 2, p. 50. Chapter 35, laws 1896, excepted hoppenweis, hop tea and white hops from the operation of the dramshop chapter of the code of 1892.