State v. Arata

Decided November 17, 1903

Ohio Supreme Court · decided 1903-11-17

Exceptions to the Common Pleas Court of Hamilton County. The defendant in error was prosecuted before a justice of the peace of Hamilton county under the pure food laws, and was found guilty by a jury, as charged in the affidavit, of selling oleomargarine containing coloring matter. Thereupon, on the same day, judgment was given on the verdict, and the defendant was fined in the sum of $50 and costs.

Decided 1903-11-17

¶1By the OouRT.

BuRket, C. J., SpeaR, Davis, Shauck, PRIoe and ÜREw, JJ., concur.

¶2The affidavit is not defective. It charges Arata with having sold oleomargarine which contained coloring matter, to-wit, butter yellow. This is all that is required, because the meaning of the word “oleomargarine,” as used in the statute, is defined by the statute itself.' The descriptive words contained in the affidavit do not wholly describe oleomargarine as defined in the statute, but do not contradict the charge as made. Therefore, whether they completely describe the substance sold or not, these words neither add to nor subtract from the meaning of the charge. They are surplusage.

¶3Exceptions siistained.