252 BOARD OF AGRICULTURE. [Pub. Doc. 



•construe the phrase. Some of the decisions, however, intimate 

 more or less clearly that in the statutes concerning liquors it means 

 "expose to view." (Commonwealth ^;. McCue, 121 Mass. 358; 

 Commonwealth v. Atkins, 136 Mass. 160.) 



Under the English statute (50 and 51 Vict, C. 29, S. 4) it has 

 been held that margarine kept for sale upon the counter of a shop, 

 but behind a screen hiding it from the view of the customers, is 

 not exposed for sale (Crane v. Lawrence, L. R. 25 Q. B. D. 152) ; 

 and that parcels of margarine placed upon a counter or shelf, in 

 view of customers, are exposed for sale, although so wrapped in 

 paper that the margarine cannot be seen, (Wheat v. Brown, 1 

 Q. B. D. 1892, 418.) 



Whether, if the defendant had kept the prohibited article in 

 closed tubs or in paper, so that the packages were visible as articles 

 of merchandise on sale in his store, although the oleomargarine 

 itself could not be seen, he would thereby have exposed it for sale, 

 we do not decide. The contention that the article was not pro- 

 hibited because it was in imitation of artificially colored butter, as 

 well as of genuine butter, at its best needs no consideration. 

 (Commonwealth?;. Byrnes, Suffolk, ss., 158 Mass. 172.) 



The statute requires a placard to be placed " on both sides" of 

 the vehicle. The defendant's wagon was a covered one, with the 

 front and rear ends open. On the inside of the cover on each side 

 was a placard, in form and size such as the statute requires. 

 These placards could be seen from the front and rear of the wagon 

 but could not be seen from the sides thereof. There were no 

 placards on the outer sides of the wagon. The supreme court 

 said : " We are of opinion that placing the placards on the inside 

 of the cover of the wagon was a mere device to evade the manifest 

 intent of the Legislature." 



The defendant also contended that the commissioner of internal 

 revenue has made certain regulations which require the place of 

 business of a person intending to sell oleomargarine to be stated, 

 and that the license issued to him states the place ; and it stated 

 that selling from a wagon is not allowed. Hence it was argued 

 that, as our statute compels a man to do that which is illegal and 

 criminal under the federal law, our statute is unconstitutional and 

 void. 



The court said : " There are several answers to this argument. 

 The regulations of the commissioner of internal revenue are not 

 made part of the report in this case ; and we cannot assume the 

 facts to be as stated by the defendant. There is nothing in the 

 act of Aug. 2, 1886, which is inconsistent with our law. The 

 authority given to the conunissioner of internal revenue to make 



