
    Commonwealth vs. Martin Dressel.
    On appeal from a judgment of a trial justice upon a complaint for unlawfully selling intoxicating liquors, the defendant was tried and convicted upon a certified copy of the complaint, which alleged a sale on a different day from that alleged in the original complaint; after verdict, the copy was amended to conform with the original complaint. Held, that the verdict should be set aside and a new trial ordered.
    Complaint to a trial justice for the illegal keeping of intoxicating liquor on March 28, 1872. The defendant was convicted and appealed. At the trial on appeal in the Superior Court, before Bewey, J., the certified copy of the complaint sent by the trial justice alleged the keeping of the liquor on March 28,1870. The jury returned a verdict of guilty; the trial justice ther came in and desired to amend his copy of the record by changing 1870 into 1872 ; and the amendment was allowed against the objection of the defendant, who alleged exceptions.
    No counsel appeared for the defendant.
    
      C. It. Train, Attorney General, for the Commonwealth.
   By the Court.

That the exceptions must be sustained is settled by the case of Commonwealth v. Phelps, 11 Gray, 72. That a new trial is proper is settled by Commonwealth v. Doty, 2 Met 18. Exceptions sustained; new trial ordered.  