Hayner v. State

Citations

• 83 Ohio St. (N.S.) 178

Syllabus

<p>Traffic in intoxicating liquors — Constitutionality of law against soliciting orders — In county where sale is prohibited — Question .of number of solicitations — Application of section 6/Q¿j, Revised Statutes — Solicitation by letter or by person — Applies to county where sale is to be completed.</p> <p>1. Section four of the act passed March 12, 1909 (100 O. L., 89), entitled “An act to amend and supplement section 5 of an act entitled, ‘An act providing against the evils resulting from the traffic in intoxicating liquors,’ passed. May 14, 1886, as amended March 28, 1906, and to further provide against the evils resulting from the traffic in intoxicating liquors,” which section makes it an offense to solicit'orders for intoxicating liquor in any county where the sale as a beverage is prohibited, is not violative of the constitution of the state and is a valid law.</p> <p>2. To prove a violation of this section it is not necessary to show a number of solicitations. By virtue of section 6794 of the Revised Statutes, which provides that words in the plural include the singular, and in the singular include the plural, proof of one solicitation satisfies the requirements of the statute.</p> <p>3. Such solicitation may be made by letter as well as in person.</p> <p>4. Where a letter soliciting an order for the sale of liquor provides, as a condition of sale, that the person solicited, on receiving the liquor, has the option to accept or not,- and to send the price named only in case he approves the goods and concludes to purchase, otherwise to return them at the sender’s expense, such approval and conclusion to purchase are necessary to complete a sale. Therefore, the solicitation is for a sale to be completed in the county of the residence or business of the one solicited, and prosecution for violation of the act is properly conducted in such county.</p>