Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1884-06-19
THE SCOTT LAW
In the Supreme Court of Ohio "A
Mixed Finding.

The Ohio supreme court on Tuesday,
in deciding question growing out of
the Scott law, held that section of the
law to be unconstitutional which pro-
vides that the property in which the
liquor is sold is liable for the tax. This
shifts the liability for the tax from the
building to the saloon keeper. If he is
worth anything the TAX may be collected.
If he is not worth anything, his business
may be closed out. The law, therefore,
so far as its power TO enforce taxation
is concerned remains as it was. The
court was not called upon by the plead
ings to decide as to the constitutionality
of its vital feature, but simply as to the
legality of certain feature growing out
of it-as to whether tenant may sell
liquor upon the premises without notify
ing the owner. The decision does not
relieve dealers from the payment of
taxes, and those who have been await
ing the decision of the court, will now
have 10 pay the June collection under
the law.
The following is the official syllabi in
the Scott law cases
VIM. B. King VS.. W. S. Cappellor, auditor of
Hamilton county, and c. a. Miller, treasurer
of that county. Error to the district court of
Hamilton county, Follet, j.: X. engaged in the
traffic of liquors on premises occupied by him
as tenant, made to the assessor the return
provided in the act commonly known as the
Scott law $50 Ohio L., l64), and on May 5th,
1888, commenced suit against the auditor and
county treasurer for the purpose, il is claimed,
of restraining the levy and collection of the
assessment, and also filed motion, accom-
panied with an affidavit, for an Injunction, but
such motion was never subnitted TO or decided
by the court. Subsequently to the time pro-
vided for the collection of assessment the audi
tor and treasurer demurred to the petition, at
which time, consistently with the record, the
tax may have been voluntarily paid; held:
l. Even if the petition is sufficient, review
ing court cannot say, in the circumstances,
there was error TO the plaintiffs prejudice in
sustaining the demurrer and dismissing the
petition.
2. Where petition for such purpose is not
only general, bat vague and indefinite in its
allegations and objects, it is to be regarded as
insufficient in substance and not merely in form.
3. Assuming without deciding that the Scott
law, SO-CdllSu.iS ISoPOSto,
still the petition in this does not state facts
sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and
hence there is no error Judgment affirmed.
Johnson, C j., and McIlvaine, j :, concur in
affirming the judgment on the ground that the
act in controversy is constitutional. Upon the
point on which the majority unite in affirming
the judgment they express no opinion.
VIM. Butzm2n and Jacob Mueller VS.. h. n.
Whitback, treasurer of Cuyahoga county. Error
to the district court of Cuyahoga county.
Owen, j.:
l. Whether statute is in effect license
law and therefore in conflict with the 18th sec
tion of the schedule of the Constitution of 1851,
must be determined from the operation and
effect of the statute and not from the form it
may be made to assume. State VS.. Hipp, 3e
o. s., 1879, followed and approved.
2. The act of 1883, commonly called the
Scott law $50 o. L., l64J, so far as it provides
for lien ON real estate occupied by tenant
who is a dealer in liquors, is in effect such
license law and therefore unconstitutional,
whether the lease be executed before or after
the passage of the act, and it will make no diff
ference that the owner in any case has consent
ed in writing to such traffic.
3. Whether the act known as the Scott law
is in any other respect unconstitutional is a
question not presented by the record in this
case, and is therefore not decided.
Judgment reversed and action dismissed.
johnson, c. j., and McIlyaine, j., dissent