Earhart v. State

Citations

• 67 Miss. 325

Syllabus

<p>1. Construction. Legislative intent. Clerical mistake.</p> <p>Where the literal reading of an act striking certain words out of a section of the code renders the code provision senseless, and it is evident that it was not intended to nullify the law, and that a clerical error was made in expunging too many words, a view being maintainable giving effect to the act and the section as amended, by striking out only a part of the words, it will be assumed, in order to carry out the manifest purpose of the legislature, that such error was made, and the act will be construed accordingly.</p> <p>2. Same. Code 1880, § 2958: act of March 9, 1888. Concealed weapons.</p> <p>In striking out of § 2958, code 1880, the clause, “or having good and sufficient reason to apprehend an attack” (Acts 1888, p. 89), it is manifest that the legislature made a clerical mistake as to the words “an attack,” and did not intend to embrace them in the act, as otherwise the section is left without any meaning. Therefore said section as amended is to be read without excluding these words.</p>