Marriage. Annulment for Impotency. Doctrine of "Triennial Cohabitation"

1921 The Virginia Law Register  
Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the mid--seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries. We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non--commercial purposes. Read more about Early Journal
more » ... out Early Journal Content at http://about.jstor.org/participate--jstor/individuals/early-journal--content. JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not--for--profit organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. ] NOTES OF CASES. 789 ing from 30 to 90 per cent. alchol violates the law and may be enjoined from making such sales, though the sales are in quantities less than required to produce drunkenness. The court said: "The evidence tends to show that Klein is the proprietor of a grocery business in Cherokee. It also tends to show that the Klein Grocery had an evil reputation as a place where intoxicants were unlawfully dispensed, that it was a place of resort for persons addicted to the use of intoxicants, and that drunken persons were frequently seen on or about the premises. Shortly before this action was begun the store was subjected to search under a warrant and considerable quantities of 'extracts' found. These extracts were of lemon, vanilla, and other flavoring substances, all containing a high percentage of alcohol. Defendant admits he had kept the extracts for sale and had sold more or less of them, and we think the record fairly supports the conclusion that they were sold and used as a beverage. "Counsel for appellant argues that the extracts are not beverages, but legitimate food products, the sale of which is not prohibited. We think it quite immaterial that these articles are not made or intended for use as a beverage, if, as a matter of fact they are potable and contain alcohol in measurable proportions. The testimony shows that the alcoholic content of the extracts varied from 30 to 90 per cent. It is a matter of common knowledge that alcohol is an intoxicant, and it is not shown that the flavoring material makes the extract undrinkable. One witness does say that he does not see how a person could imbibe enough vanilla extract to become intoxicated because its tendency would be to make him sick before he drank enough to become drunk. But surely this is not the test. Alcohol is none the less alcohol because it is disguised by a foreign flavoring, and its sale is none the less unlawful because it is in quantities less than is required to produce drunkenness in the buyer."
doi:10.2307/1107283 fatcat:umon7w73mngyxosbksdmqo7fuy