
    Bob Hail v. The State.
    No. 3190.
    Decided December 6, 1905.
    Occupation Tax—local Option—license—Statutes Construed.
    There is no statute authorizing a license for the occupation of selling malt liquor in a local option precinct; the license is for selling intoxicating liquors and the State tax thereon is not less than $200. A prosecution for pursuing the occupation of selling malt liquors without a license in a local option precinct is no offense known to the law.
    Appeal from the. County Court of McLennan. Tried below before Hon. G. B. Gerald.
    Appeal from a conviction of pursuing an occupation without license; penalty, ninety days confinement in the county jail.
    The opinion states the case.
    
      Winbourn Pierce, for appellant. Ex parte Gray, 11 Texas Ct. Rep., 734.
    
      Howard Martin, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.
   BROOKS, Judge.

was prosecuted in the county court, under an indictment charging him with pursuing the occupation of selling malt liquors without having procured a license. The occupation being taxed $50 by the State and $25 by the county. The record shows that if the occupation was followed at all, it was in a precinct where local option prevailed. There is no statute authorizing a license for the occupation of selling malt liquors in a local option precinct. The license is for selling intoxicating liquors in a local option district, and the .State tax thereon is not less than $200. It follows, therefore, that appellant was not prosecuted for any offense known to the law. The judgment is accordingly reversed and the prosecution ordered dismissed.

Reversed and dismissed.  