Hon.~Russel A. Moran Opinion No. 

### v-590

Cbtinty Attqrneg Palo pinto County Re: Result to be certified by Palo Pinto, Texas ' C6mmissioners1 Courtin a local option election in: which two issues were submitted.

Dear ~Slr:

Your letter requesting an opinion of this department reads aS follows:

"Will you please advise wha'i'results the Corn-: mi.%ioners Cow% of.Palo Pinto County, Texas, should declare nrider.thefollowingstaterpentof facts: :
~.FACTS ~. : "On the date of the election Palo Pinto County had legalized s.+leof beverages dontaining aLcoho1 not In excess of fourteen (14%)peF.centum by voluni6,- .I and those of higher alcoholic.contentwere prohibited. On May 

### 8, 1948,an election was held which submit&d" .to %he voters the following isiues as set forth in:- :- "Art. 

### 666-40 (g).'Forprohibitiri&the dale .of .;

ialcoholic

beverages that contain .,. alcohol In excess of PO& (4s) ', ~ per'~centum

by weight' and 'Againstprohibiting the sale of alcoholic beverages that contain alcohol in excess of foyr (4%) per centum by weight': (h) 'Forprohibiting the sale of all'alcohollobeverages' atid 'Againstprohibiting the sale of all alcoholicbeverages'.Bon. Russ81 A. Moran, page 2, V-5gi1

"On the first Issue (g) the voters by eight votes voted against prohibiting the sale of alcoholic beverages that contain alcohol in excess of four (4%)per oentum by weight, but on the second Issue by four votes voted for prohibiting the sale of all alcoholic beverages.

"In view of the fact that the Commissioners Court is required on the fifth day after the election (Thursday,May 

### 13) or as soon'thereafteras praotlca+ :, ble to canvas the returns and deqlsxe the result.of the election; your opinion on this matter at the earliest possible time will be greatly appreciated."
Subdivision '(b)

of Section 20 of Article XVI of the Texas Constitution, as adopted in 1935, provides:

. 'The Legislature shall enact a law or laws whereby the qualified voters of~any county, justlce,tsprecinct or inoorporated'town~ or city; may, by a majority ,~ vote of those voting, determfne from time to time whether.the sale,

~f.,Jntoxicating

liquors for beverage purposes~

shall bef'prohiblted .or~ legalised'vithin~

the prescribed llmits~;::ai&such laws shall contain provisions for voting dn'the sale of intoxicatingliquors of various t es and various alcoholic content. (Rmphasis is%.zpplied':throughout)
Pursua&tothis coni titutional mandate,'the hegislature In 1935 setforththe varlons~issues which might be submitted ata.local',optionelectlon~.'These issues were,framed so as to submit',to~'the~voters the ques~tion

of whether or not alcoholic beversges~of the various types and alcoholic content should be legalized or Ijl;ohibited. As finally amended in 1937, 'the various lssnes which may be voted upon in any local option election are.found in Section40 of Article I of the Texas Liquor Control Act;"hodlfied as Article 

### 666-40 of Vernon's Penal Code. Since you have stated that Palo~:Plnto County; on the date of the election, 'hadlegallted'the sale'of beverages contalnlng alcohol no,tin excess of.fourteen per Oent by volume only the following 'portionof Articles

### 666-40,V&non's Penal Code, Is pertinent to the facts submitted:



# ‘\\, \XI. Russel A. Moran, page 3, V-590

. "Iti'~a&aq

xl&$ the.sale of.beveragea'con~sin~1~ 

### i&k&3+A-t+ in ek&s,g 

### of f&x+&q (14%): p&p:.:..Y centum ~byvolume has:been legali.kd, and those of.~,:"' higher~'alcoholic'content:areproh,lbdt,ed,~.one or :t; .I 1 m of'.the

~followi&ig

iesues 'sharr

be,..submltted

.ln .~. any prohlb$tory election:

.;.'. ~- .., "(8'):~ !For'prohibitingthe sale of slcohulic~ '. beverages that~centairi.~alpohol'in tixcess

of four ,. (4%)per-centum by,i&@t' .and 'Againstprohib~fting the'sale df,alc.oh?lio:beverag~s 'thatOontainalqo- ~~ ho1 inex+ss~ of ,.four ,(4$)--per,

+ntum ~byYeight;l "(h):'tForprohibiting Ethel sale of all altio- X‘ ~' holic beverages: -ann~tllgainst,~prohlbiting the'sale of all alcoholic beverages;'".'~ ~. ~'i
contained-in both subaragraphs the~'voters .ofPalo IntoCounty;. The eXeectlon.'result&,d ln:a majority voting fin svor of the;'fo~lowIng:Fo Xssn0s.l ,~ z:.~,, "Agaihst'

prohibiting the sale of*alcohoiic.i"'~':,

.. beverages ;tliat

contain'alcohol in'excess~of f&r G ::-1 '.(4%),per.centuin~~y~weigh~." ,'.;cz '~'2I' '-' .'~" I. ..,,. ~~. -. ..,.'...~"' .' .,,~ ,, : ":: "For~prkbiting the saie'of"ail a~llcoho&? ': ._ be.y?yzes

.

n .,: ;: ; ,,~ .:: ?I!& .que.stion

~for'our

dec'lsion

-is,whatresult'shoulb .: ne Conrmfsdoners' Court now cer~tifgi A,thoro$@ search'.of: very available."authqr~ty relating to looal~opti,~n-~~~c'tlons ss revealed:no ease similar to,the.fact sltuation:beforeI& ~.: or has'any~'enllghtenment, been secured,

from textbooFVriters: ther. than general~statements- conqe~ing:e~e$t,$o~ns; ;,'._ .- :: 'The.foilow~~',~Catement :ofj&~'gener&l,,,ru~e Is.found a 29 C. 'J.Si, .Ble.ct~ons.,,~ge'~~ 17$:; ~. .:1; :~": :~ .a.. and'exbeptln &o.se.,cases in ,whSah 'statutespres&ibing rules to'be obsb$erved by,a % .~ voter lnthe preparation of~his baalot are shown' to be mandatory by prohibitive~terms; ~'InhIbiting the counting of a ballot in case of deviation fromHoii.Russel A. Moran, page 4, 

### V-590

Four authority InTexas supporting the proposition that the ballot should be~.glveneffect if the Intent of the voter maybe ascertained from it, see the cases of Wright.v. Marquis, 255 S. w. 

### 637; Johnston'v. Hooker v. Foster, 19 S. W. (2d) 911. Peters, 

### 260 S.W. 911;

Another statement of the. eneral rules appears 

### 16 Tex. Jur. 114, Elections, Sed. 9%

?In order to secure. the purposes for which elections are held, the lirle'ls ~thata ballot; like any other writtelllnstrumenti'shouldbe ex- &mined in the light of the attendant circumstances with a view to ,ascertain&ng the intention of the voter." .~ 

### in

We have examined the eledtion results In the light of the authorities.quo,ted,above and Inan effort,to~ascertasn fiotithem the .int&it'of'the'voters of P&lo Pinto County. Our effort has ~metwith failure. The results disclose that the voters on ~the.

one~hand~

expressed a desire to favor the sale of beverages,'of..a'~&eater'alcohollc' content.than four per oent by weightarid dh.,the otherhand expressed a kontrary.deslre to prohibit the,s,ale:o'f all, aloohollc beverages.

' "We'b6~iev~,the &aion for the conflicting vote may inlarge measure be attributed to the unfortunate phrasidg'of. various issues'contained in Article 

### 666-40,Vernon's Penal Code. So&s of 'theissues are couched in such language asto be misleading to ~theaverage voter. For'lnstance, the two"lssues snbmltted In this election beginning with the words "Against prohibiting" undoubtedly tisled~~some of the voters. The results of the election in Palo Pinto County clearly indicate the neeU for a revision of Article 

### 66>F40of Vernon's 'PenalCode.Eon. Russell A. Moran, page 

### 5, V-590

'&~.is:&ir opinionthat the result of .the,localoption election under~-consid~~a~~Son,,.is impossibie.of.as~ertainment..Such election is therefore voidi~~and the.Commiss%oners' Court should so certtfy.

The iocal option elec.t$on,in Palo Pinto County Inwhich two.lssues~were submitted to the voters;~. one resultQ@.dn~the majority votltug.agalnst pro-~' ,,_' hlbiting the&le,of.aldoholic'~beverages containing ',,.:.,, alcohol in excess of fourper cent by weIght,,andthe other resulting in the majority voting for prohibiting' ' the sale of all alcohollo-,~beverageq.-~is vo$d.+
Yours'very truly ,.! : ATT&IR$Y @3n6F TRY@

CYM:rt ,AssBtant ,i.._ ~.,, / .~ :.j.. .!~.

. ,.. ~.