Case ID: ohio-st_67/html/0494-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "By the Court.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The State of Ohio v. Peters.
    
      Jurisdiction of police judge or mayor — Confined to offenses in own town — Pure food laws — Prevention of cruelty to animals —Sections 3718a, 6981/ and 698Jja, Rev. Stat.
    
    In cases of violation of the laws to prevent adulteration of food and drinlc, the adulteration and deception in sale of dairy products, and drugs and medicines, and any violation of the law for prevention of cruelty to animals, or under Section 6984 of Revised Statutes, or section 6984a thereof, as enacted in Section 3718a, Revised Statutes, the jurisdiction of a police judge or mayor of any city or village is confined to offenses committed within his city or village.
    (Decided February 3, 1908.)
    Exceptions to the Court of Common Pleas of Wood county.
    The defendant, B. H. Peters, a grocer doing bush ness^at the village of North Baltimore, Wood county, , was arrested on complaint of an inspector of’ the Dairy and Food Commissioner, made before Hon. ,3.' E. Shatzel, mayor of the village of Bowling Green, Wood county, charging said Peters with a violation - of the Act of May 16, 1894 (91 O. L., 274), “to prevent fraud and deception in the manufacture and sale-: of oleomargarine and to promote public health in the state of Ohio.”
    Motion was made on behalf of Peters to dismiss the complaint for the reason that the offense was not alleged in said complaint to have been committed within the village of Bowling Green, of which said Shatzel was mayor. The defendant’s motion was denied, and against his objection he was put upon trial before said Shatzel, mayor of Bowling Greer, without a jury, found guilty and sentenced to pay a fine, that being the only penalty provided for violations of the act above mentioned, by persons not manufacturers.
    Thereupon, Peters prosecuted alleged error in the court of common pleas of Wood county, and such proceedings were had that the judgment of the mayor of Bowling Green was reversed for the reason that the complaint did not allege that the offense was committed within the village of Bowling Green, Wood county, Ohio. The prosecuting attorney of Wood county duly excepted to the decision aforesaid.
    
      Mr. J. M. Sheets, Attorney General; Mr. Elmer G. McClelland, Prosecuting Attorney; Messrs. James & Beverstock, and Messrs. James M. & Walter F. Brown, for plaintiff.
    
      Mr. James O. Troup, for defendant.
   By the Court.

Construing together Revised Statutes, Sections 1824 and 3718a, as amended April 3, 1888, so as to give effect to all the language in these sections, we are of the opinion that the true intent and meaning of the two sections is that the mayor or police judge of any city or village shall have final jurisdiction to hear and determine any prosecution for a misdemeanor’, unless the accused is entitled by the constitution, to a trial by jury, and his jurisdiction in such cases shall be coextensive with the eounty, except that in cases of violation of the laws to prevent adulteration of food and drink, the adulteration and deception in sale of dairy products, and drugs and medicines, and any violation of the law for prevention of cruelty to animals, or under Section 3984 of Revised Statutes, or section 6984a thereof, as macted in Section 3718a, Revised Statutes, his jurisdiction shall only be as to offenses committed “within his city or village.’'

Exceptions overruled.

Burket, C. J., Spear, Davis, Shauck, Price and Crew, J.J., concur,