The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1870-11-02

governments
all eternity. therefore affirm, with perfect conf
dence, mat tue mode have referred to IS the only
EXERCISE tho s 2 smFsy ID same nsSps ia Their
legislation aud 70 operate on the same !hSiVlaua:
Ogden W heat a' Reports, apd procoodcdiI i
! Within tho power OF Congress TO adopt porlioa Of
os g s'a ss 81 same ss ssS ss ssa pvs s
United States, 70 be punished as such by G,atlaet
And % er h ~ sea Il fy the
10 INC sane subject matter In ali cases within inc
neccsay 1A0 d he sans nature cou
will please observe the terms In which
Of iSe STATE asi law ana oo ,a aaa
| by Congress IN aid Of the State policy inc execu-
| ton OF policy proceeding in the same direction
and by the exercise of power OF the same nature
First--You cannot nnd distinct power TO which 70
second-in an cases within the rropo5it.on where
the power exercised is OF the same ni.arc you nave
conflict Of legisatye wills operating on the sane
subject matter and thai conflict IL repughant 10 Tue
Constitution OF Congress- which has reserved 70 tae
States al The powsrs nos e4gressy ae1egated - ta1
from being repugnant 70 tle constitution,
unless you can ind separate and -. distinct
subject matter. The third reason lie3 within the
terms Of the proposition Yon cannot have that SUI
! piemacy OF any act or Congress which VIII alone
solve the comic. Of two legislative Wills lf, Tor OK
ample, tne state has jqrsdlcsion TO pass ieastry
| the very adoption Of the law which is mace In Inc
act OF Congress and II The State has enacted penal
con- Of Legislative wis. il YOU eau nnd
supreme and Independent power In Congress
OF different nature to oct on tins subject you solve
the conflict and the State legislation fails But lhe
very terms q the ptop9sson ana 4, The ASSUMPTION
Tresp,poses tina; Tho State law continues 10 stand
anlalaired. Where tnen. can you assert, ia such
Nowhere. There Is no supremacy IL Congress as
serted anywhere. State law Is not done
tweon the provisions or pclcy OF TIE two laws, ald
the act or Congress has no operation excepting
fun forcs. '''''' '''-'
The United States District Attorney must ina a
supreme power In Congress 30 act on the subject or
the registration OF voters. aud must also Ana this
oct OF Congress execution q that power, to The
% OF M 9owr "a Is T on no ae , same sqs
article J., section g. or the constitution on whcn 10
bottom this extraosoinary statute. It 80 hagpeni
ing ana purpose OF wlllch--as that meaning
ana purpose existed IN the minds OF the
wno adopted it--that DO traced clearly as in
reference TO this clause SOW, II thatartce IS 10 30
manner OF voting then this Law is not in execution
OF the granted power. The clause says "But Con-
ses my at any TINE ty law make or alter the
yoting.n All that was in,ended by the framsrs
OF the conatitution was 70 secure to the national
legislature experimenting power. Thag ia case
any state should fail 10 send delegation to Con-
gress should fail to have such an election law as
dus representation, then Congress should have the
power to step IN and correct mar evil ~ Enc ap
piiclLle 10 Lhc whole country. That Is the only
power given to Congress ia lie matter.
Counsel elaborated his views u great length and
on concluding was ollowedby tho District Attorney.
ARGUMENT OF UNITED STATES DISTRICT ATTORNEY
DAVIS.
United States District Attorney Davis, in reply
Orened with reading extracts from the authorities
and the statutes supporting the legality OF tue pro-
ceedlngs in controversy. He said that 1t was well
settled rule OF law that the authority OF an officer
issuing process of court must be made to appear
by ayerment II the process Dc n cue ioIn, mat IS
criminal p. ocess 1t wSs essential 10 establish as q
fact that the process was not only good IN
form a. Da o gHsd "a ae "r sc 9y q spe
nient IN this csse ID broad enough 10 establish any
Indictment for misdemeanor. 1t was sullcielt uil-
der tho most stringent rule 10 aver the law OF which
the court is to take notice mat The appointment OF
N ohlcer was duty made in pursuanca OF that law.
to the requirements Of the statute. Similar counts ha
| been acted on in the courts IN England and III this
forth that The offence charged vas committed by the
| Notwithstanding In substance as the statute
o That the tn. D5aa va an hssi a ss
acted in pursuance Of tho laws OF Sew York. 1t
vas o9y necssssiy further 70 Say ina AZ ressa
was TO be chosen Inc person here accused appeared
and procured himself 70 be REGISTERED as q voter,
lie not being legal voter in the district in Witch he
registered himself They proceeded in Ibis pros Gu
ton for an offence against The laws Of Congress as
| the laws or the State OF New YORK. lie thought, in
conclusion, he had presented enough to the Court In
susCllnlnent OF the indlctIuenG TO rest.
Mr.. St0ughteu called the attention OF the Court to
one OF the counts, which includes all the others. IL
sets forth That Terrence Quinn, at registration,
knowingly aud fraudulentiy did cause his.naue to
be put down as voter. lie submitted that where
o party was Indicted for crime, which crime con-
ssioa as is said, in an offence against the laws OF
the Unltea States, because he appeared before
Slate tribunal which could only be organ zed IN a
particular way, with special ana limited power.
the Indictment mus be held to be Insufficient except
1t sets forth the facts which substantially show that
l fIA f1t va
with the statute laws Of the State II is condition
precedent that this board sitthat they le the cath
organize as board before they can act as board.
| District Attorney Dayis-That has oeen decided
/ Mr.. sioughton-I would like to know where and
bow TINS board was 10 certain extent organized or
witnesses, ana the ist Of is nemoera Is 10 be lled
as matter OF record There can be 10 legistra,
ton Ill the registration list is complete and until
that Is done Eo oiiolce can be committed against
! the law organizing the board.
! Mr.. stonahton having resumed his seat, Judge
woodruff inquired II counsel had anything 10 say
! on the other branch OF the case.
| LIP. sTouGHTON'S ARGUMENT.
! Mr.. StOlghtOn again rose and projected With his
argument. lie said that for tee first tame IN the his
tory OF tie government Of this country did they see
board OF Officers under various names. rising up
| our midst 10 interfere with ard control elections
hitherto neli within tho states quite unobstructed
| no deiuston about that that for eighty years we
] have lived without law bearing seInblance to
this And iE was not delusiOn that up to this hour
such law as ihls involving the construction Of the
| frst article OF the constitution, has never becl
the SUBJECT Of Judicial interference. THIS 80 act Ct
| the history Of Congressional legislation In the
! United States In view OF the Importance OF this
il counsel had ventured, the part Of the defend
] ant Ionnally but really IN execution Of what we
conceive TO be duty TO the Court and to the law,
TO present such considerations as appear proper on
| this occasion. MT. Stoughton then proceeded to
contend that the act OF Congress prescribing the
qualification OF electors for members OF Congress
| and the mode In which these qualifications Shall
be proved is utterly void. On tins subject counsel
any earlier hour OF The evening to adjourn and tho
| lateGes OF the hour when he last rose to speak.
| Mr. Soughton, however, grouped oil his facts and
| authorities and points OF pleading with his usual
! succinctness aud ciearnes3 within very brief