(defendant charged with misdemeanor crime of keeping pygmy goat and chickens in home in violation of plaintiff’s ordinance; defendant challenged ordinance as unconstitutional on grounds that he lived in a free country and could do as he pleased on his property; court noted that state (OH) constitution also stated that private property is held subservient to the public welfare; right to maintain animals not a fundamental right entitled to strict scrutiny; ordinance rationally related to legitimate goal of government to protect public from unsanitary conditions and noxious odors by banning certain animals in urban areas; court noted that defendant could attempt to persuade policy-makers to allow such animals as pets).