New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1864-05-31
xouNsTAmm,s SENTENCE.

In the Circuit Court of the United States yes
terday large crowd assembled to hear sentence
pronounced upon Solomon Kohnstamm. JUS
tees Nelson and Shipman were on the bench,
and the judgment which must have an effect
over very wide circle of criminal cases, was
delivered by the former. The case decides the
important point OF law that the statute known
as the fraud act of 1868, while it repeats the act
of 1923 and all other acts and parts OF acts OF
the same nature in certain contingencies, yet
in its saving clauses, leaves the law OF 1923 in GER
tain other contingencies as fully operative as II
the act of 1868 had never been passed. 1t was
claimed by Mr. Evarts for the defense that the
more recent act, in repeating previous statutes,
had actually left our courts without jurls-
dicton over frauds no matter how aggra-
waited they might be, and Mr.. Brady sus-
tanned this opinion. Another point, which was
as summarily ovcrruled by Judge Nelson in his
decision, was that, supposing that the new act
saved to the Government the right of prosccu-
ton under the clauses of the old act, it still did
not leave the right Of punishment. Hence,
however guilty Kohnstamm might be proved to
be, there was still no authority in the Govern
ment to punish him for his crimes. The
argument of Mr.. Eyaris in support of his motion
for new trial for Kohnstamm was that the
Court, in its charge to the Jury, had overStepped
the limits of the evidence, and allowed the Jury
to take for granted that the presentation of the
false writing had been made by Kohnstamm in
person, whereas, in fact, there was no direct
proof upon this point, and it might be inferred
that the money in payment Of the claim had
been sent to Kohnstamm by the hands OF an
orderly, and the claim itself might have been
presented by some person or persons unknown.
This objection was disposed Of in very lucid
and concise statement, by the Court, OF thy
facts adduced on the trial He showed that il
was clearly proved that Kohnstamm had per-
s0nally on more than one occasion, negotiated
business pertaining TO the passage OF this clam
through the Mastering and Disbursing office;
that this bill had annexed to it what purported
to be an order from Pfeffer, in whose name it
was made out, to pay the amount OF it to the
prisoner; that the prisoner had bought
the bill, and had it in his possession
previous to the time when presented (;
that he had taken steps to get il properly certi-
fed, it having been rejected at the Discussing
! office for want of a proper certificate; that
when again presented, the payment was made
by check or draft on the Assistant Treasurer
in favor Of the prisoner; that this check was
deposited in the Bank of Commerce to his
credit, and that the prisoner received the ayalls
of it. The attempt was made by the prisoners
counsel to induce the Court to substitute for inn
prsonment at hard labor the milder sentence
prescribed by the Act of 1908 less term OF inn
prsonmcnt without hard labor, and fine
of one thousand dollars; but the Court
set aside the application. and pronounced
the sentence, which was that the prisoner,
Solomon KohnstGnm should he confined
at hard labor, in the State Prison at Sing
Sing, for the term of ten years.