Ward v. City of Macon
Opinion
1. The act penalized by the first section of the ordinance of the City of Macon which the plaintiff in error was charged with having violated, to wit, the assembling of two or more persons anywhere within the limits of the city for the purpose of gaming, is not covered by any State law, and that portion of the ordinance is valid. See, as to the principle of law involved, Callaway v. Mims, 5 Ga. App. 9 (62 S. E. 654) ; Athens v. Atlanta, 6 Ga. App. 244 (64 S. E. 711) ; Sheppard v. Jackson, 11 Ga. App. 812 (76 S. E. 367); Jones v. Rome, 15 Ga. App. 41 (82 S. E. 593); Morris v. State, 18 Ga. App. 684 (90 S. E. 361) ; Ellis v. Golden, 18 Ga. App. 749 (90 S. E. 495) ; Allen v. Jennings, 134 Ga. 838 (67 S. E. 883).
2. There was some slight evidence which authorized the finding of the re[321]*321corder, and, that finding having been approved by the judge of ihe superior court, this court is without authority to set it aside.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
103 S.E. 191 (Ward v. City of Macon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.