Quinlan v. Conlin
Opinion of the Court
The plaintiff is the proprietor of a saloon at No. 138 Park Row, this city, which has been duly licensed for the sale of liquors. On Sunday July 7, 1895, he removed all intoxicating drinks from his premises and offered for sale thereon soda water, sarsaparilla, ginger ale, and seltzer water. While such sales were going on, plaintiff was arrested by officer Downing, of the Sixth precinct, and arranged before Magistrate Deuel, who discharged him, an the ground that he had committed no offense. Captain Young, the commander of the Sixth precinct, has informed the plaintiff that if he opens his premises for the sale of nonintoxicating drinks on the 14th inst. he will arrest him, and keep on arresting him as long as he persists in selling on Sunday. The plaintiff, therefore, applies for an injunction enjoining the officers from making the threatened arrest, or interfering with his business.
While the sale of soda water, sarsaparilla, and the like on Sunday is not a violation of the excise law, it is a clear violation of the statutes for the observance of the Sabbath, and renders the plaintiff liable to arrest on that charge. Pen. Code, § 266, forbids all trades upon the Sabbath, except where the same are works of necessity; and by section 267 "all manner of public selling ór offering for sale of any property is prohibited, except that articles of
Application for injunction denied.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.