—strict liability] is the general rule where acts which are not mala in se are made mala prohibita from motives of public policy, and not because of their moral turpitude or the criminal intent with which they are committed

Where the killing and sale of a calf under a specified age is prohibited, there may be a conviction though the party was ignorant of the animal's age.

Certainly, the cases that first defined the concept of the public welfare offense almost uniformly involved statutes that provided for only light penalties such as fines or short jail sentences, not imprisonment in the state penitentiary.

—it was held that one could be convicted for the statutory offense (under the act concerning offenses against the Public Health of 1866) of killing a calf less than four weeks old for sale even though he had no knowledge that the calf was less than four weeks old.

—fine of up to $200, six months in jail, or both, under St. 1866, c. 253, § 1, for killing calf less than four weeks old for purpose of sale

As discussed, public welfare statutes criminalize conduct that has not necessarily caused harm but is "potentially harmful or injurious" (emphasis added).

One line of cases argued that, given the nature of the offense, criminal strict liability was permissable. For example, a Massachusetts court declared what it took to be a “general rule "concerning the mens rea requirement

These penalties are a far cry from the petty punishments, such as a fine or short jail sentence, typically associated with a crime that does not require mens rea.

Under a statute of Massachusetts which provides that whoever kills or causes to be killed, for purposes of sale, a calf less than four weeks old, shall be punished, etc., it was held that it was not necessary to allege in the indictment, under the statute, that the defendant knew that the calf was less than four weeks old.

An indictment has been sustained which charged that the defendant, with intent to steal the personal property of a certain woman, the property "being in her pocket and on her person," did "thrust, insert, put, and place his hand upon the dress, near and into the pocket of the said woman, without her knowledge, and against her will," &c.

[BOOK] A Treatise on the Law of Evidence: Vol. 2

[BOOK] Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Criminal Law Opinions

[BOOK] Defining Crimes