¶1The evidence objected to was rightfully admitted. The indictment avers that a meeting of jfehe qualified voters of the various wards of the city of Salem, for the election of municipal officers, was holden on a certain day, “ the same being then and there the regular annual municipal election.” But as the charter of the city of Salem, and the various statutes in amendment thereto, are public acts, the court will judicially take notice that the municipal officers of the city of Salem are elected by the citizens, meeting and voting in wards. As a matter of literal exactness, it would have been more correct to have alleged that “ meetings ” of the voters of the various wards were held on that day, instead of describing it as “ a meeting ” in the singular number. It appears to us a sufficient allegation that the voters met in their respective wards, and that a meeting was held on that day in each of the wards. The expression “ at Ward One in said Salem, at the election aforesaid,” is a sufficient averment that Ward One was one of the “ various wards ” that had already been mentioned. Exceptions overruled.
122 Mass. 12
Commonwealth v. Desmond
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided January 15, 1877
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1877-01-15
Indictment under the Gen. Sts. e. 7, § 29, alleging “ that the city of Salem is a municipal corporation duly established by the laws of said Commonwealth, in said county of Essex, and that on the fourteenth day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-five, a meeting of i he qualified voters of the various wards of said city of Salem, for the election of mayor, aldermen and members of the common council, and other municipal officers, having…
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently July 1923
2 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1877-01-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →