The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-11-01

selves persons to appear in the Supreme Court and
pecome naluralzed citizens upon "proof satisfactory
70 tne court" Without tine defendant had some hid
uen power 10 transform minute, 1nanlmate ana ma
seral substance INTO life and clohe II with the full
STATURE ana enuoWments OF human DelngSr Eitner
such was the case, or perhaps q moro reasonable
presumption leads Us to believe that some person or
persons with attendant Witnesses pers0nated these
nve nctltious names ana perpetrated fraud upon
the supreme Court or In some manner deceived the
court; because how could the Judgment be entered
and the copys In the court insert the names OF these
i've fictitious persons and the clerks signature be
subscribed to each certificate, unless the identical
persons claiming the legal right to these Certificates
were In court or some other person or persons per-
sona&ed their names and thus committed fraud
upon the court, II We are to believe that thecourt
actually and regularly ordered the ave certificates to
be given to the person or persons assuming the
names mentioned In the certincatesf
Upon examination Of the cases cited BY the de.
fence as TO record OF citizenship being conclusive
evidence OF its validity. did not perceive that fraud
or collision was alleged to attach to this record or
that any foundation laid by proof OF such state
OF facts, and upon further examination OF decisions
bearing upon that point found that Judgment de-
cree or sentence may be impeached by proof, nrst.
when 1t Is shown that such Judgment never ex-
listed or was void ab iasfti0; secondly. that Il was
fraudulent and covinous; thirdly that it has been
Now, does not the evidence in this case show that
these five certificates are not genuine certificates;
saa lis 6eyond the limits Of possibility that such
fully identity them no person or persons who can
truthfully claim themg And, moreover according
Rosenberg with them IL they be genuine, and by
what authority to make sale nr them tn any nersnn
other than the persons for whom each was origi-
naly issued ana to whom each NAV OF right beongs
These are questions under the statute which the
facts IN this case abundantly support and compel
the defendant under the rule Of evidence 20 rebut
decide on the evidence before me- that the pre.
sumption is that these certificates Of citizenship are
procured the same to he falsely made and the ons
prOOandt was upon the defendant to snow that they
were genuine, because 1t was in his power to do So
and he Is called upOn Dy well settled PRINCIPLES OF law
n thew be genuine certiacates To move them smch
Lord Mansfeld in the Domvias case saws GAS II sell
dom happens that absolute Certainty can be on.
tanned in human AFFAIRS therefore reason and public
utility require that Judges and Mi mankind i'm form.
ino their rninons ~ Ire trntb nY racta .hnuG ha
regulated by the SUPERIOR number Of prohabities an
one side and on the other.''
Acting upon that principle nv Judgment was soon
case and could not arrive AT any other conclusion
in the absence OF proOf nv the defendant in relation
that there was probable cause to believe him ruty.
In most cases cOncede that the proof Of crime ia
separabe from that OF the criminal and in every in
stance the co,.ne deIicti onnht m ha rrnvod ahar
Inv direct Testimony nv Nv nsasumntSva evidences ~
the most cogent and Irresistible Kind. II has been
said that there IL to he NO nresnmntion IN Criminal
c"Sas. 'n INT .. w oo LII ~ LIE, t ~ Ual
trnrw o r rS 3Sa,s p a,es. 70 ,he CON
In t ''. nrnor as OIL anu nIuvis ooc
i1n},ad sta,es 20 Wav,,6 1ni,, Mn" Sc"yn. 1oe
Waht n.a.es w. . NY aau, ua!soL 400, besih
thomn o"se'I "lt nv " A.asile kuI,. WueIo
mere Is no evidence TO raise the presumption,
anu ny p, eason - W ue IequHeu 70 explain
~ -, rant sm. enough mas Heen provea
n, in Tue absence oi eApanatiOn or c0ntradlction;
o1. When sucn proof mas Deen gwen anu tne nature
Vi uie Case ~ suCh as 70 hunit Oh explanation OF
cOnsrauictlon, II the conclusion 10 when the PROOF
. en.s nc uIuS anu tnc accused oners no eXp!ana-
wise than adopt the conclnsion TO Which the nroof
. Illus spohe on Cnarles ADDOt one OF tne
~ S .spious JUDGES Una. ever adorned ne court
VI hins bencn. Sucn principle IN law should al
Ways operae upon the hlind OF the magistrate In
m .ne character OIL presnmptive evidence,
N cases when the lie Or liberty OF the person Is in
suhtu.
Fiagrant anu reckiess as may De inc acts OF per-
nd wo INV ny ns re iraud on ane Ireasy
iia zap uie sources VI revenue py peTyurcd oaths
WI corIups IicAs VI couccaimeut, deoase tne CON-
81, tie currency anu ollerWise evaue me
s aIu ~ @ Il, w eneces ~ ,e saey nna
.ieng.n ., OUT county as corrupt nanot Dox
lnd irannuent na,urailation OF voters because
nese st.ihe az Tue uuiWarks vi our lnstnutions ana
rahcnSe as Dy our Iatners ID one Oh the
nost cnersneu anu sacreu rghts Vi the people. tne
,nly saeguard 10 seu-goverhment: upon TINS alone
40 we proca,m our liberty ana enact our laws.
Gorrnpt Inns perperate fraud upon the courts IN tho
making OF citizens OF foreign birth to enjoy the ines
a, ran"ncsW W,ort ana r.n J
laws and nnr e,actfnns unon which we ~ Ipnch a.
,anS cor Inst IA nra,ar xrr,as,n =, ~ ,a,a,
, III JuS mu pi III, nS " sne
, ana SnS 10 Dc 1 th ooSi ~, ,,e
,,raud boast thot ,ro ara norioon nt,iau, .. nc
P,ouu "a h una, v" y" aie @ ei"AeHs ~" -"
Whatever noitcaI marty In THAR ambition "a .nc
cand yhothar rnnnhcan ~ damonrotc ~ h~ ,1h.,
EEL ,s agPoca n or or Dy Wnas
nan of a,tacs on Tho eact,~a fr.ncniss onS en
ged nv men who trlde vim the moor ;@norant
.migrant shond meet WITH = star, rei,,rs az aha
,ans or Tho neonla ana he made 10 ar yar c ,enai
os ~ tho 10 " IN order maj thor S,,trra fr OIL a.
ns, ahomia Ia ,asnS ana thay VOC r,a
4, yson,d no trin,ra with com,non snsa and acd
nenlt ~ the human nSd"rsand,na mon ali the facts
nroved IN tins case nv the nrosecntien with the de
,andcn, Silent % IN fher fruth az Ia iav for mo ~
~ than 10 hold The defendani Tor trial ana
tS indicted 10 await the verdict of Twelve III his
conntrgmnn unon mo cha rye nrefarred againat hin,
Ths surety Is ordered TO surrender the defendant
4, thu custody OF the United states Marshal and
hereby command the Marshal TO Keen the saii de-
fendant in his keeping TO await the action OF the
Grand jury IN DEFAULT OF sloooo pan.
Tho derendent Rosemberg wns snhseanently ar.
rested on the indictment of the Grand jury hut
being Attended ny ms counsei anu number VI
lrends ne procured paii LOT ms sppetIahcc On the
DAY 81 trla wnlch WIN oc helu carry ~ 'e present
lerin, anu ci, , ,n1 eour'. 80, ,o,,.y.v
A soon IA CouIni.sioner Osborn had rendered bi7
decision requiring Rosenberg to renew his bail in