Cincinnati (City) v. Burkhardt

Citations

• 20 Ohio C.C. Dec. 350

Syllabus

<p>CRIMINAL LAW — MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.</p> <p>Swing, Giffen and Smith, JJ.</p> <p>1. Power of Municipality to Regulate Emission of Smoke.</p> <p>It is within the power of a municipality under Sec. 7, Clause 3 of act 92' O. L. 346 (Rev. Stat. 1692; Lan. 3102; B. 1536-100), to provide by ordinance for the regulation of the emission of smoke.</p> <p>[For other cases in point, see 6 Cyc. Dig., “Municipal Corporations,” §§• 1773-1777 — Ed.]</p> <p>2. Smoke Ordinance not Void Unless Unreasonable.</p> <p>The test as to the validity of such an ordinance is its reasonableness; and unless it is shown to be clearly unreasonable, it should not bo declared void.</p> <p>3. Proper Parties Defendant in Prosecution.</p> <p>In a prosecution for violation of an ordinance regulating the emission of smoke, the proper defendant is the corporation or person permitting the emission, or the employe causing it.</p> <p>[Syllabus approved by the court.]</p>