The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1866-02-07
The Alleged Frauds on the Custom
Housc-The Indictment Quashed.

The Alleged Frauds On the Custom
Housc-rhe Indietment Quashed.
UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT.
Before Judge shipman
FrR a-zAe Dxsssd States %. kesss EuSsom CAa.mcv
a~d Bavxey-This case came up pursuant 10 adjourn
m>ut The points submitted by counsel for the defence
in conn Nance with the wish OF the Court, we're as
follows
By Mr. James-'rhe statutes or ~: ,1..-' =
under which the accused arc indicted were na.s.d
Sd Of March, 1926 Section ~ Of that act H., WIG
=, vuence &C., the n""'' ---ared that
cially provide -D,ent OF which IS ho' sp0'
shall IA for by any law of the United States, &C.
receive the same punishment as the laws OF the
State in which coded places situate provide Tor the
like offence. The common law Of England, adopted 10
this State by the constitution Of l771 ana the SUP
crime Of forgery At common law fo- ,ery was
only nmsde%eanUr a and upon conviction
by nne, Imprisonment and sr,ch other corporea
punishment as the court in IT, discretion might award
Each court punished according to its discretion and
crime OF forgery until It has been provided and
lined by statues; and the first statute which passed In
England the subject was that Of Elizabeth cap a.
which created the forging of deed offence and pro-
vided ths, punishment The great number of English
statutes which followed created the crime of forgery
teiony each statute providing the punishment for the
crime and since the existence OF these statutes all the
| indictments ana convictions have been founded upon
l ItiSSeu
on the subject Of forging deed or bond was IN 1902
The provisions Of this statute embodied in the
statute OF 1813the revised Laws Of that period-and
upon which tho present indictment is founded Forgery
at common law existed In the State OF New York pre-
vious 1902 and down to this period but rs the CON-
law cannot be said to provide punishment for the
crime the statutes the only criminal code by which
the Punishment can be said to be provided The offence
thepunshment the statutes only be looked TO- The
common law makes forgery offence, but does not
vide the punishment and 1t is submitted that in the
OF conviction under the indictment before the
by the statute of the State Before 1902 when the
statute passed. court in district might fine
without imprisonment another court of another district
might mprison without fine; and what therefore, could
State for the crime of forgery within the meaning Of
the seventeenth section of the act of the United States
the Sd OF March, 1925? The Revised Statutes Of 1918
of the State of New York defining the crime and pro-
passed. and 1t is commended that the Legislature must
| have intended to adopt the punishment provided by
those Statutes for 1t be said that any other pun
ishmen provided within the meaning of the seven
| teenth section of the United States act of 1925.
THE INDICTMENT QUAsHED.
Judge Shipnan having had all the points In the
submitted to him. said that after mature debetion he
had come to the conclusion that the indictment upon
which the accused put upon trial defective;
that the statutes had failed 10 designate the crime and
the punishment thereof at the time; that Con-
gress could never have contemplated enacting what
should constitute an offence and then leave the punish
ment of toa law OF any State for like onence-a
punishment which, In this case the state had re-
pealed He regretted that he compelled to
this decision; he would have preferred that the parties
should have been fairly tried, and il innocent acquit.
ted, and found guilty that they should be punished
AS was he was bound to accept the motion and quash
the Indictment
The defendants after discharged, and re-
ceived the congratulations of their friends in court