State ex rel. Pettigrew v. Hall

Citations

• 109 La. 290
• 33 So. 318
• 1903 La. LEXIS 384

Syllabus

<p>ITINERANT VENDERS — LICENSES—INDICTMENT —TITLE OF ACT — APPEAL—REVIEW.</p> <p>1. Nothing on the face of the indictment showing that the business of defendant was-interstate commerce, and no evidence having been offered to show that fact, the court properly overruled a motion to quash based on that alleged fact.</p> <p>2. State v. Lee, 31 South. 14, 106 La. 400, is affirmed, as follows: “The title of Act No. 49 of 1894 expresses but one object, and section 12 of said act does not go beyond the title by denouncing the mere selling of drugs, nostrums, etc., as an offense; the offense there denounced consisting of the itinerant vender professing to cure disease and deformity by the use of drugs, nostrums, etc., sold by him, and by other means mentioned.”</p> <p>3. The overruling of a motion for new trial will not be reviewed by this court unless duly excepted to.</p> <p>4. Evidence not duly incorporated in a bill of exception will not be noticed by this court.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>