65 Miss. 238 | Miss. | 1887
Lead Opinion
delivered the opinion of the Court.
The demurrer to the plea in abatement was properly sus
But there is no express repeal of general laws in regard to, the sale of liquor, in the local option act, nor are they repealed by necessary implication. Such laws are not repealed, but suspended or displaced for the time being, by the local option act when put into operation, in so far as they may be inconsistent with that act. Hearn v. Brogan, 64 Miss., 334.
It is consistent with the evident purpose of the legislature, and the terms of prior laws of a general nature on the subject, and of the local option act, to say, that an offence under such former laws may be prosecuted and punished according to their provisions, notwithstanding the local option act may have been put into operation, and such former laws may have been thereby rendered, for the time being, inoperative for general purposes. There is material difference in a statute being repealed or suspended or temporarily displaced. Sturgis v. Spofford, 45 N. Y., 446.
The judgment is affirmed.
Concurrence Opinion
concurring.
I am of the same opinion. The repeal of a statute is a remission of penalties inflicted by it, because of the absence of authority to punish when the law giving it has ceased to exist. But where a law is not repealed, and is merely suspended, it still has vitality to authorize punishment for its violation before its suspension. A repeal makes the law as if it had never been. -Suspending its operation for a time leaves it operative as to the past, and in all respects wherein it is not abrogated by the new statute.' A repealed statute is dead, and no sting can be inflicted