Where a statute in terms prohibits the sale of intoxicating liquors, a contract of sale is of course invalid. Some difficulty has arisen where the statute was not absolutely prohibitory, but merely prescribed certain conditions to be complied with by dealers. An example is where a statute imposes a penalty for selling without a license. It is generally held that such a statute is not merely for purposes of revenue, but is to diminish the evils of intemperance, and prevent disreputable and objectionable persons from engaging in the business, and that sales without a license are prohibited and rendered illegal.42
Somewhat in line with these statutes are those which regulate the conduct of saloons, such as statutes prohibiting billiard tables, bowling alleys, etc., in connection with a saloon. An agreement in breach of such a statute is illegal. A carpenter, for instance, cannot recover the price of erecting a bowling alley in a building appurtenant to a tavern, where a statute prohibits it from being so kept.48
So, also, under a statute imposing a penalty on any person owning or controlling any premises who shall suffer them to be used for the sale of spirituous liquors, a person who owns a building, and has knowledge that his tenant at will is using the premises for the sale of spirituous liquors, and who permits him to continue in possession, cannot recover for use and occupation.**
40 Loan by pawnbroker who has neglected to comply with statute. Fer-gusson v. Norman, 5 Bing. N. C. 76. Failure of printer to print his name on the work as required by statute. Bensley v. Bignold, 5 Barn. & Ald. 333. Unlicensed peddlers. Stewartson v. Lothrop, 12 Gray (Mass.) 52. Agreement to construct building not complying with building regulations. Stevens v. Gourley, 7 O. B. (N. S.) 99; Burger v. Koelsch, 77 Hun, 44, 28 N. Y. Supp. 460. Failure to measure wood sold, as required by statute. Pray v. Burbank, 10 N. H. 377. Agreement for threshing grain, where machine is not boxed as required by a statute, intended to prevent injury to workmen. Dillon v. Allen, 46 Iowa, 299, 26 Am. Rep. 145. Sale of shingles not of size prescribed. Wheeler v. Russell, 17 Mass. 258. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 105; Cent. Dig. §§ 468-497.
41 On this subject, see Black, Intox. Liq. §§ 242-276.
42Griffith v. Wells, 3 Denio (N. Y.) 226; Territt v. Bartlett, 21 Vt. 184; Aiken v. Blaisdell, 41 Vt. 655; O'Bryan v. Fitzpatrick, 48 Ark. 487, 3 S. W. 527; Vannoy v. Patton, 5 B. Mon. (Ky.) 248; Solomon v. Dreschler, 4 Minn. 278 (Gil. 197); Lewis v. Welch, 14 N. H. 294; Cobb v. Billings, 23 Me. 470; Melchoir v. McCarty, 31 Wis. 252, 11 Am. Rep. 605; Bach v. Smith, 2 Wash. T. 145, 3 Pac. 831. See "Intoxicating Liquors," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) §§ 327-830; Cent. Dig. §§ 467-485.
43Spurgeon v. McElwain, 6 Ohio, 442, 27 Am. Dec. 266. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 105; Cent. Dig. §§ 468-497.