Commonwealth v. Brown

A complaint, on the Pub. Sts. c. 207, § 29, alleging that the defendant, on a day named, and on divers other days and times between that day and the day of making the complaint, at B., “ was and is an idle and disorderly person, and on said days and times, at said B., has neglected all lawful business and habitually misspent her time by frequenting houses of ill fame, gaming-houses, and tippling-shops,” is sufficient, without further alleging that the defendant was under any necessity or duty of laboring or supporting herself, or following any business or vocation.

Complaint to the Municipal Court of the city of Boston, alleging that the defendant, on March 6,1885, and on divers other days and times between that day and the day of making the complaint, at Boston, “ was and is an idle and disorderly person, and on said days and times, at said Boston, has neglected all lawful business and habitually misspent her time by frequenting houses of ill fame, gaming-houses, and tippling-shops, against the peace,” <fcc. In the Municipal Court, and in the Superior Court, on appeal, before the jury were empanelled, the defendant moved to quash the complaint, assigning, among other reasons therefor, the following : “ There is no averment that the defendant was under any necessity or duty of laboring or supporting herself, or following any business or vocation.” Blodgett, J., overruled the motion. The defendant thereupon pleaded nolo contendere ; and alleged exceptions to the overruling of the motion to quash.