Smith v. State

Decision Date01 August 1892
Citation15 S.E. 682,90 Ga. 133
PartiesSMITH v. STATE.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

Syllabus by the Court.

1. According to the ruling in the case of Roby v. State, 74 Ga. 812, the presence of the ordinary at the drawing of the grand jury, under section 3912 of the Code, is not essential. This being so, his failure to sign the minutes after the clerk has made the proper entry thereon is a mere irregularity, and will not vitiate the drawing, or render the jury drawn illegal. The presence of the clerk at the drawing may also be dispensed with on the same principle, a majority of all the officers designated to conduct the drawing having appeared and acted, such majority in this case consisting of the jury commissioners alone.

2. By the general law, (Code, § 809b,) as amended by the act of September 24, 1883, (Acts 1882-83, p. 55,) liquor dealers are authorized to register without obtaining permission from any one, and without paying any county taxes. The local act of September 28, 1889, (Acts 1889, p. 1344,) applicable to the county of Harris, declares it to be unlawful to sell in that county by the gallon or in larger quantities, unless the seller shall first pay to the county commissioners a tax of $25, obtain the written consent of two thirds of the bona fide resident freeholders within three miles of the locality where it is proposed to sell, and file the same with the county commissioners at the time of registering, and that it shall be discretionary with the commissioners to decline to permit any applicant to register. This local act contravenes that provision of the constitution, (Code, § 5027,) which declares that laws of a general nature shall have uniform operation throughout the state, and no special law shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by an existing general law.

3. The local act being unconstitutional and void, the court erred in charging the jury.

Error from superior court, Harris county; J. H. MARTIN. Judge.

John Smith was convicted of unlawfully selling intoxicating liquor, and brings error. Reversed.

R. A. Russell and Blandford & Grimes, for plaintiff in error.

A. A. Carson, Sol. Gen., for the State.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment reversed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT