
    NOTARIES PUBLIC — REMOVAL.
    [Hamilton Circuit Court,
    1899.]
    Smith, Swing and Giffen, JJ.
    In re Stephen B. Hayman, Notary Public
    Removal of Notary Public — Evidence.
    Evidence of misconduct and unfaithfulness in office, to warrant removal of a notary public, should be clear and satisfactory.
    Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton county.
    Hayman, a notary public, was tried upon charges of misconduct and unfaithfulness in the discharge of his duties, and was found guilty, and an order entered removing him from the office of notary public of Hamilton county, Ohio, assessing the costs against him, and directing that the clerk transmit to his excellency the governor of the state a copy of the charges and specifications, together with a copy of the entry, certified under the seal of the court, as provided by sec. 123, Rev. Stat.
    
      Campbell, Bates, Cien Dening & Meyer, for Hayman.
    Thomas H. Darby, for the state.
   SWING, J.

We are of the opinion that the judgment in this case should be reversed, on the ground that it is not sustained by sufficient evidence. The evidence in a case of this kind should be clear and satisfactory, that the party was guilty of the offense charged. And it seems to us that it comes very far short of being such.

Judgment reversed and remanded. 
      
      For decision of the count of common pleas, as to act justifying removal, see 5 Dec., 550.
     