An Ohio statute provided that an officer of a bank who received a deposit therein "when he has knowledge that it is insolvent" shall be subject to criminal liability. The defendant, a director of a state bank, was indicted under the statute for receiving deposits therein knowing the bank to be insolvent. The court of appeals reversed a decision of the common pleas court dismissing the defendant. On appeal the defendant contended that the statute violated the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Federal Constitution in that the use of the word "insolvent," without providing a definition thereof, rendered it vague, indefinite and uncertain. Held, the statute is constitutional. The word "insolvent" has a commonly accepted meaning and must be so construed in interpreting the statute. Eastman v. State, (Ohio 1936) 1 N. E. (2d) 140.