United States v. Hemani · ¶31

Just consider how some of the statutes the government relies on defined the term. To qualify as a habitual drunkard under an early Arkansas law, someone had to drink to such excess that he was “incapable of conducting [his] own affairs.” Ark. Rev. Stat., ch. 78, § 1 (1838) (W. Ball & S. Roane eds.) (Ball & Roane). A statute in the Minnesota Territory required an individual to be “mentally incompetent.” Minn. Terr. Rev. Stat., ch. 67, § 12 (1851). A Connecticut law spoke of a person who had “lost the power of self-control.” Act of July 25, 1874, § 1, in 1874 Conn. Pub. Acts 256. And in a statute governing the District of Columbia, Congress defined a habitual drunkard as “any person who, by the use of intoxicating liquors . . . has lost self- control, or become incapable of proper attention to the care and management of his affairs, or habitually or periodically neglectful thereof, or…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.