The Birmingham age-herald., 1908-12-19
Supreme (0DYt Decision
 In EaSt Birmingham Case

1 any territory under the provisions of ! this or any other similar law, no other l or subsequent election shall be ordered ] or held for the same territory or any
 part thereof within six months next 1 after said election.
 | Whether the provisions of article were I intended to be the only law hy which l the limits of a city of 25.0O0 or more inhabitants could be extended, or NEeth | CT, to effect such end, article might also | be proceeded under, need nor be de- l cided as the result would be the same in this case If said city acted under article then section 1O7S is m absolute prohibition on any election within six 1 months. If the election could be held to have taken place under the fourth article, then an election Is equally rro- hibited within six months provided the act of August 8, 1907, Is a similar law" to that contained in the code.
 The word similar is derived from the Latin word, similis, meaning like, and while It's meaning in some connections is exactly corresponding, precisely alike,' yet it is frequently used to mean
 nearly corresponding" resembling in many particulars" "somewhat alike" having a general likeness s'-Webster's International dictionary. Worcester de- fines it as like" resembling having resemblance,' and the Century dic- Gn3rHCTGr1SEfcS in common" Hike in form. appearance, size qualities. relations, etc; 7aviur a more or less marked resemblance; in some respects identical bearing resem- blanee"
 Sc, in arriving at it's meaning ;n legis- laton it is necessary to consider its con nection and the object intended to be accomplished by it's use.
 In construing the tariff laws, hold vVh hiOb threads already dyed were "of similar description" to goods which were woven in gray and afterward printed, alth ough they differed in several other particulars the supreme court of the United States said: "The statute does not contemplate that goods classed un- der the words "of similar descriptione shall be in all respects the same. Greenleaf vs. Goodrich, 101 U. S. PTS, 2s3.
 Where testator left bequests to certain charitable and education in- stitutions, it was said Similarity is not identity, but resemblance between different things;" the Friends school' and the East Greenwich academy were similar institutions to Brown university" though the studies taught by them are narrower in range and lower in grade. to some extent. than those which are taught in Brown uni versity;" and they differed in some other particulars-the court contfnu- ing, said: Tt was apparently the pur- pose of the testator to advance the higher education of the people" etc In the same case it was held that a Home for Aged Women" and Home for the Aged of the Little Sisters of the Poor" were similar institutions to a Home for the Aged Man" Rhode Island Hos pftal Trust company vs. Olney ct all, 13 Atlantic, 11S.
 The evident purpose of section 1125 of the code of 1907 was to provide that, after the people had once been called on to vote on the question of the an nexation of the additional territory to the municipality they should not be called to vote on substantially the same proposition again within six months
 In this case, the territory involved was included in both elections The electors are the same, for while the act of August 8, 1907, provides that ''all the qualified electors residing in the territory may vote, and that the election shall be held under the pro- visions of the general election laws of the state, and section 1882 of the code provides that such qualified voter who has resided within the boundaries of the territory proposed to be brought into the city for three months next preceding the election, may vote" the constitution requires that in order to be qualified elector the person shall have resided in the precinct or ward three months. The provisions in ar ticle of the code, not found in the act of August 8, 1907 relate mainly to matters of detail within the powers of the governing body of the city at any rate.
 However that may be, the limita- tion is peremptory and 1t results that the election of January 6, 1908, is valid and that that of June 30 1908, is in- valid; and as under the election of January 6, 1908, the law does not go into effect until October l. 1909, the city of Birmingham is without authori- ty to exercise its franchise over said territory now.
 The judgment of the court is re- versed and the cause remanded.
 Tyson. c. J., and Anderson and Dem son, J. J.. concur.