Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1855-02-01
II. No order to ,bu, up. or.b,,e the place

II. No order to shut up, orsbate the plac,
can rightfuly be made, unless the nuisanc,
continues TO exist at the time 'such order /,
made. Unless. therefore, the Court 10 sati.
fed that, OF the time Of making the order,t ,the
place is KEEP, for the sale Of liquors in viola
ton OF the act, no order should be made. -
For it is unlawful business, (snd not the
place, per se.) that creates the nuisance and
hence, where the business has ceased, there
IS no nuisance 10 abste. No mans property
con be forfeited as punishment for crime,
the consultation providing, that no convic-
tion shall work forfeiture Of estate. -
art. !, Sec. l2.) Hence there is no power
to deprive man Of the use of his property
unless it be necessary in order to abate an
exisiiag nuisance.
u. The order 10 not to be directed 10 any
officer. 1t is not an order to be executed BY
an officer. 1t IL an order to the person con.
victed, obedience to which may be enforced
u 'he hu'sapIe be eo~.'ansd. by attachment
foE contempt OF Court. The order being
made, if the convict cease 70 keepa house Of
public resort, Of the character named, or re-
ferred to, in the 4th section, he need give
no bond, and having so ceased, no attach
ment can properly be issued against him -
But If he desire to continue keeping such
house Of public resort, he must. in order to
avoid an attachment, give bond. lie has his
election, TO quit keeping house oil public re-
sort, or to give bond and keep il without yio-
,sting the law,
10. The following information is sufficient
in law.
The STATE OF OHIO, CLERMoST County,
IS. Probate Court, May term, in the year of
our Lord one thousand eight hundred and ff-
ty-four: John Johnston. Prosecr ting Attor.
ney OF the State of Ohio, for the said county
Of Clermont, now here in said Probate Court
in and for said county, in the name and by
the authority and on behalf OF the said State
Of Ohio, Information makes, that on the sec.
ond day Of May, in the year Of our Lord one
one thousand eight hundred and fifty -four,
and from that day until the commencement
Of proceedings hereir, to wit, on the twenty
third day Of May. in the year Aforesaid, at the
raid county OF Clernont, in the said State Of
Ohio, one Frederick Miller, was. and has
been uulowfuly the keeper of 4 room of pub
lie resort, where intoxicating liquors. were
and have been then and there sold by said
Frederick Miller, in violation Of an act of
the General Assembly of the State of Ohio
entitled San act to provide against the evils
resulting from the sale OF intoxicstin liquors
In the State of Ohio" and passed by said
General Assembly on the first day o. May,in
the year aforesaid, contrary to the form OF
the statute in such cases made and provided,
and against the peace and dignity Of the
State of Ohio. JOHN JOHNSTON.
Prosecuting AIRY Of Ciermont Co.
IA. g. prosecution und er this act cannot
be commenced in the Probate Court. 1t
must be commenced before Justice O: the
Pea CO or Mayor. But no very strict confor-
nifty bet ween the information and the orig
inal comp laint is necessary. II the charge
is substantially the same in both, there is no
room to quash the information on the ground
of variance. The proper rule upon this point
has already been stated at this term, in Gales
and Goodno y. The State.
Nul tiel record is not proper replication
to the plea Of former conviction prescribed
in the Probate Code. For there is no pro.
jert of record in the plea. The proper re.
plicaton is a genera denial Of the allegations
of the plea; and the issue thus made up is
to be tried by the jury emPanneled in the
cause.
JudJments and orders rpyersed.