New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-09-21
WEDNESDAY,, SEPTEMBER 2l, 1870.
ATTEMPTED FRAUDULENT REGIS
TRATION.
Violation of naturalization Law

(, The cases of William Williams, Andrew
! Holon and James Finney, charged by the
affidavit of j. D. Houston, superintendent
| Of registration at the Sixth Ward, with
| violation of the act of Congress of Jnly IA,
| 1870, was brough. up for disposal before
| United States Commissioner Weller, yester-
day morning at ten o'clock. j. w. Gurley,
| ESD, Assistant United States District Attor-
ney, assisted by J. Il. Beckwiri, Esq, appear
| ed for the prosecution, while Messrs. Tuly
& Kerr appeared on behalf Of the defense
ex-Rccorder Gastinel, also for the defense.
being absent at the commencement Of the
| proceedings.
! The case Of Williams was first examined.
The charge embodied in the affidavit Of
| Mr.. Houston was to the effect that William
| Williains, on the fifteenth day of Septem-
| ber 1870. in the Second District Court of
! the parish Of Orleans, in the city of New
! Orleans. District of Louisiana, in a certain
| proceeding had under the naturalization
| laws Of the United States. in the matter of
! the naturalization Of one Andrew Holon,
! did appear before the said court, and having
! been duly sworn, did knowingly and cor
rupuy swear falsely, in substance as fol-
lows That said Andrew Holon had re-
| sided five years in the United States and
one year in the State of Louisiana, next
preceding September Is, 1870, wherefore said
! Williams is charged with perjury.
| Mr.. James u. Houston, Superintendent of
Registration III the Sixth Ward, was called
! to the stand and sworn. His evidence was
to the effect that Holon, on presenting him
self for registration, had produced certifi-
| cate of naturalization, and on being inter
rogated as the law requires, had averrcd
| that he had been a resident Of the United
| States only three years That William
| Williams. who accompanied him as wit
ness. stated that he had known Holon five
or six years: that ON the registrar interro-
eating Williams as to how he conld know a
man in the United States for five or six
years when the man himself stated he had
! been IN the United States for only three
| years. he had been unable, or at any rate,
did not, give a satisfactory explanation,
wLercupon the registrar had both Holon
! '
! forth in his atiidavits.
! Lawrence Mcdonnell, police officer was
| then sworn His evidence was to the effect
that he was in the sixth ward registration
Office on duty, when Holon and Williams
came there for the purpose of registering
| the latter The officers evidence corrobo-
rated that of Mr.. Houston.
| Mr.. Fernandez WAS then sworn. Is ciprI,
| in the sixth ward registration Office. The
| evidence of this witness, SO far as it went,
! coIToborated the testimony Of Mr.. Houston.
Sergeant Bohnecke. of Irene station was
! then sworn. He testified to certain inter
rogatories he put to the accused while in
| the lookup. Mr.. Tully objected to the
evidence as of no value, the accused
! being under duress at the time he was
! questioned. The court ruled that the wit
| hess could be questioned respecting all the
| circumstances accompanying his interroga-
| tories TO the accused while in confinement.
and his evidence estimated accordingly.
| These several witnesses We're closely cross
/ examined by counsel for defense
| For the defense James Feeny was sworn.
Tho testified in effect that he had known
| Williams since 1883 or 1859 and known
Holon about five years.
| Andrew Holon. sworn-Had known VIII
| liams about six years: had known him in
New York in 1864. Told the superintendent
! of registration that he had been in New
! Orleans three years. Has been in LouiSi-
ana six years. part of the time working at !,
saw mill ont of the city. Never told the
registrar that he pad known Williams in
| Mexico. Is IA native Russian Finland
| The case of Williams rested here. and
| that Of Holon was called. Ey-Recorder
| GaFtinel entered at this point and took part
| i'll the defense.
| The affidavit against Holon made by Mr..
| Houston, as Superintendent of Registration
in the Sixth Ward, charged that HOlon had
| teioniously obtained from the Second Dis
trict Court OF the parish of Orleans, GER
tihcate of citizenship and naturalization i'll
| his own name, well knowing the said certiti-
cate to have been procured by fraud and by
false statements; and further, that said
Hclon had feloniously attempted to nse the
| certificate thus obtained. for the purpose OF
| being registered as a voter, etc.
| James ID. Houston sworn-Gave evidence
to the effect that Holon had applied for
| registration as Il voter. on the fifteenth Sep
| tember, 1870, and on beiI.g duly sworn by
witness, had stated that he had been in the
United States only three years.
On the cross examination by Mr.. Gastinel,
considerable light sparriug took place be-
tween that gentleman and the witness, the
questions of the counsel appearing to indi-
4
| political antagonism. The witness in reply
to the questions, states that he was Repub-
| Hcan did not know the political status OF
| accused; was not actuated by polltacal teel-
| ing; did not know nor care whether accused
was a Democrat; Holon appeared in his
sober senses; had not told witness that he
was in the United States navy and served
| under Admiral Farragut.
| The clerk of the Sixth Ward Registration
Office, Mr.. Fernandez, being sworn, stated
| that he was present when Holon came to be
| registered, accompanied by Williams. Will
| liams said he had known Holon five or six
| years. Holon said he had been in the
| United States three years.
! Officer l.. Mcdonnell, testified that Will
| Hams. II answer to the registrar 8 questions
| To Williams, how he could know Hoion five
or six wears il Hoon had been in the United
| States but three years, Williams had replied
| that he knew Holon in New York.
| Sergeant Bohnecke being sworn, Mr., Gas
! tincl strongly objeo ted to his testimony being
| taken, as he had questioned accused when
under the intimidation arising from duress.
The court ruled that, as in the former case,
the witness might be questioned and his tes
| tnnony afterward estimated accordingly
This witness stated that in answer to a ques
non Holon told him that he had been III the
United States fifteen DAYS. Mr.. Gastlnei
commented on this evidence IA showing that
the whole affair had arisen from misunder-
standing.
james Feeny testified, i'll effect, that he
had known cot and on''l Holon in New
Orleans for about five years
William Williams testified that he had
lived III this country since 1858; had known
Hoon since 1864; had first met Holon in
New York
Charles Welsh sworn-Is connected with
a shipping office; has known Holon in New