
    The State v. Bock and others.
    The act of 1810 (Hart. Dig., p. 933) to raise a revenue by direct taxation, in so far as it levied a tax on tlie retailing of merchandise, retailing of spirituous liquors, and keeping of tenpin alleys, was constitutional.
    Appeals from Galveston. Suits were brought by tlie State against Bock for keeping a house for the retail of spirituous liquors in quantities less than a quart, and for keeping a ten-pin alloy, and against Labadie for selling goods at retail without having paid tlie occupation tax imposed by the act of 1846. (Hart. Dig.., p. 933.) The defendants demurred to the several suits; the demurrers were sustained, and the State appealed.
    
      Attorney General, for appellant.
    
      Alexander fy Atchison, for appellees.
   Lipscomb, J.

In support of the judgment of the District Court, it is contended that tlie act imposing a tax on the occupation of retailing goods, of retailing spirituous liquors, aud of keeping a ten-pin alley, is repugnant to tlie constitution, and void.

In tlie case of The State v. Stephens (4 Tex. R., 137) we decided thatit there “ can be no doubt that tlie quarterly return could be legally required from the “ defendant, as an occupation tax, if he was engaged in buying and selling “ merchandise or receiving the same for sale as an agent or auctioneer.” This decision applies to eacli of the above cases. The court therefore erred in sustaining the demurrer; and the judgment is reversed and the causes remanded in each of tlie cases stated.

Reversed and remanded.  