United States v. Morgan (222 U.S. 274)

(Redirected from 222 U.S. 274)


United States v. Morgan (222 U.S. 274)
Syllabus
847486United States v. Morgan (222 U.S. 274) — Syllabus
Court Documents

United States Supreme Court

222 U.S. 274

United States  v.  Morgan (222 U.S. 274)

 Argued: and submitted October 19, 1911. --- Decided: December 11, 1911

The defendants maintained an establishment in New York where, after filtering Croton water drawn from the city pipes, adding mineral salts, and charging it with carbonic acid, the water was bottled and sold as 'Imperial Spring Water.' In October, 1908, a food and drug inspector applied to a druggist in Newark, New Jersey, for several bottles of this water. The druggist, not having them in stock, ordered them from the defendants, who shipped them from New York to the druggist in Newark. He delivered them to the inspector, who paid therefor.

The judge, in his opinion, treats the prosecution as having been instituted by the inspector, though this does not affirmatively appear in the record, and the defendants were not indicted until April, 1910, when they were found guilty of shipping misbranded goods in interstate commerce. They moved in arrest of judgment on the ground that it was not alleged that they had been given notice and a preliminary hearing by the Department of Agriculture, contending this was a condition precedent to the return of a valid indictment. The judge held that such hearing must be granted in all cases where the prosecution was instituted by the Department of Agriculture or its agent (181 Fed. 587), and from a later order sustaining the motion in arrest, the government brought the case here under criminal appeals act.

Solicitor General Lehmann and Messrs. Jesse C. Adkins and Loring C. Christie for plaintiff in error.

[Argument of Counsel from pages 275-277 intentionally omitted]

Mr. Alexander Thain for defendants in error.

[Argument of Counsel from pages 277-279 intentionally omitted]

Mr. Justice Lamer, after making the foregoing statement, delivered the opinion of the court:

Notes edit

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).

Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse