The Daily state journal. [volume] (Alexandria, Va.) 1868-1874, 1872-02-20
lfrom the Washington Chronicle, Feb. Isl
THE ENFORCEMENT ACT.

Take Cognizance Of Perjury Committed i,
United States Courts!
=. A case of the utmost Importance, anc
likely to attract more than ordinary at
tention, has been decided in the United
States Circuit court for the Eastern dis
trlct of Virginia, held at Alexandria.
Washington Fauntleroy, colored citi.
zen resident of Tappahannock, Va, made
complaint before a United States Circuit
court commissioner in November last
against Thomas CroXton, for violation
OF the filth section of the enforcement act OF
1871. Wv VI
On the examination before the Commits
sloner he testified that the accused
threatened to remove him from rented
premises if he voted the Radical ticket at
the then approaching State election. Crox-
Ton was put under bonds to await an in
dictment in the United States Circuit court.
subsequently, on the testimony of Crox-
TON, fauntleroy was indicted in Essex
county, Va, for perjury alleged to have
been committed in falsely swearing that
the threat referred to was made in the pre-
sence OF two witnesses whose names were
mentioned
Although the trial before the Commits
sloner took place in Caroline county. the
accused was indicted, tried, and convicted
IN Essex county, and his special pleas.
aVerrlng that the case was exclusively in
the Federal jurisdiction, and the offense. il
any, was committed in another county.
were both overruled.
Application for writ of error and s,1ner- |
sedaas was denied in the Supreme Court of
Appeals of the State, owing to an evident
omission in the statutes authorizing the |
granting of appeals, by reason of which |
the prisoner, no matter how defective the |
Judgment, is required in any event to re-
man IN confinement until the next session
OF the Circuit court of Essex county. in
May next. -
Under these circumstances. the Attorney |
General Of the United States directed the |
United States District Attorney to applv to
the Circuit court for a habeas cornus To
bring Fauntleroy before that court to de-
termine the legality of his confinement.
The return Of the sheriff brought nm the
whole record, and by the Indictment It an
peared that the prisoner was convicted mn.
der the circumstances stated above The
precise question presented was this: Can
a person be tried in State court for ner-
Jury alleged to have been committed in n
court of the United States /? Gov. Fl. r.
y, " ellis appeared for the petitioner, and the
State of Virginia was represented bv ;ts
q, Hon. James @. TAYLOR.
Court '0
l. That every citizen restrained of his
hoerty IN violation of the constitution, laws
of treaties OF the United States, is entitled
% sue out the writ of habeas corpus from
.he courts OF the United States to inquire
nto tne cause OF his Imprisonment.
z. That this offense is an oftense under
.he laws Of the United States solely, and
mat the alleged false swearing was not, in
dependent of the statutes Of the United
states, an effense either at common law or
lnder statutes OF the State; that no State
,,ourt could legally try, convict, or punish
OF perjury, unless the officer or person
VINO administered the oath had authority
o DO SO under the laws of the State.
.. That under the laws of the United
,tates the Circuit court has exclusive iuris- /
,ictlon over all oifenses against the laws Of !
ne uhlted states, excepting in the specified t
ases over which the same act gives the 9
United States District court jurisdiction. /
9. mat the only case in which the State {
0urt mas jurisdiction to punish acts in Vi t
latlon OF the laws Of the United States r
re those IN which the act constitutes two /
lienses, VIZ: one against Federal and the q
ther against State authority, such as pass 6
lg, counterfeit national bank notes. In /
uch cases the passing of any counterfeit in a
ne slmllltude OF genuine notes is punisha-
lie under the State statute. In the case at !,
ar, however, independent of the Federal !;
tatute, there was no oftense committed. /