Puckett v. State

Citations

• 71 Miss. 192

Syllabus

<p>1. Local Option. Act 1886. Result of election. Report. Evidence.</p> <p>While the act of 1886 (Laws, p. 35), known as the local option law, requires the commissioners of an election to canvass the returns of the inspectors, it is the result alone that is to be reported on oath to the board of supervisors. It is not essential that the report recite that the election was held at the prescribed places, and that the commissioners had canvassed the return.</p> <p>2. Same. Election. Report of result. Record thereof.</p> <p>No action upon said report by the board of supervisors is authorized or required. Hence, it is immaterial that it was spread on the minutes at a special and unauthorized meeting, and, on a trial of one charged with violating said act, copies of such report, whether taken from the original or from the minutes, are competent evidence of the result. McDonald v. State, 68 Miss., 728.</p> <p>3. Evidence. Code 1892, § 1621. Result of election. Judicial notice.</p> <p>Where it appears that the report of the commissioners was not spread on the minutes of the board of supervisors, this court, being required by § 1621, code 1892, to take judicial notice of the result of local option elections, may resort to any and all sources of information as to the character and condition of the original report.</p>