The Rock Island daily Argus. [volume] (Rock Island, Ill.) 1872-1873, 1873-06-24
woMAN's SUFFRAGE.
Attest CASE.
Susan B. Anthony on Trial for voting---Judge
seldsn's Argument in Her Behalf

in violation Of law at the City of Rochester, |
at the last November general election, was
called in the Circuit Court Of the United
States, now in session in this village, at 3
p. III. to-day. The defendant personally
appeared in court, accompanied by Mrs. |
Matilda 5. Gage and other ladies, and was
represented by her counsel, Henry ). Sci |
den and John Van Noorhis Of Rochester,
Richard Crowley, District Attorney, repre- !
scented the United States A jury was
empsneled without difficulty, the Govern
ment exercising the right Of challenging
but once, and the detendent three times.
The District-Attorney made brief state
ment Of the facts on which he relied for a
conviction. and which were charged in the
indictment, that Miss Anthony voted at
the last election for the Congressional can
ddate for the Twenty District, and
for the Congressman at large Ii was
conceded that the defendant was, on the
9Th Of November, 1872, a woman.
Beverly W. James was sworn by the
Government as witness, and testified
That he knew the defendant that he was
an inspector Of Election in the Eighth
Ward. First District of the City of Roch.
ester that Miss Anthony voted the Con
gressional, State and Assembly ticket at
that poll that he put the several ballots
in the boxes where they respectively be
lOuged that Miss Anthony was not chal.
lenged that he was one of the Board of
Registry that the defendant appeared
before the Board and claimed the right to
be registered that objection was made as
70 her right 10 vote that the Board decid-
ed that she was entitled 10 vote and regis
hap huf Of ha
Supervisors of Election was present aud
advised the inspectors that the defendant
was entitled 10 be registered, and they did
it that Miss Anthony claimed the right
10 vote under the United States Constitu-
ton and not under the State law she
claimed the right under the Fourteenth
Amendment the name Of the defendant
appeared on the poll-list as number %,
aud It also appeared that she voted the
Electoral, State Congress, and Assembly
tickets.
In opening the defense, Judge Seldru
claimed that the case was one Of great
magnitude and interest not only 10 the
defendant but to the whole people. When
the defendant claimed her right tn be rcr
istcred and % vote she was rs much en-
titled TO both OF those rights as any man,
and when she voted il she fully believed
that she had a right o. vote she committed
no crime The question for the jury was
whether she did vote in good faith. he
hrvlng that she had a right o. vote.
Judge Nelden then stated that for the sec
und time in his professional life he was
compelled 70 offer himself rs witness in
behalf OF his client Being sworn, he test
flied that before the defendant voted she
called on him for advice a. u her right t0
vote that he took time to examine the
question aud did So very carefully, and
that he then advised her that she was las
much a voter as | or any other man
that he believed then that she had legal
right to vote, aud he believed 40 now, aud
on that advice she voted
The defendant then offered herself as a
witness on her own behalf on the subject
of intent and good faith. The District At
torncy objected 10 her competency tn test.
ty in her own behalf and the objection
was sustained The defense then rested
John + Pound was then sworn BY the
prosecution. Tie testified that on the ex
animation before Commissioner Storrs thu
detednant stated that she should have Of
tered To- vote even If she had not had
Judge Selden advice; that she had not
particle of doubt Of her right 10 vote
There was no further testimony given
and Judge Selden proceeded ~ address.
the Court and jury in an exhaustive argu
ment, occupying nearly threeahours in it,
delivery He enunciated three PROPOSE
tinus First That the defendant was le
gally entitled 10 vote at the election II
question second, If she was not 80 entitled
but believed Chat she was so, and voted il
good faith in that belief. such voting doe
not constitute a criminal uffense under tn,
statute and third, that she did vote il
such belief and in good faith. He sal,
that the two first questions were for tn,
Court and the last for the jury unless tht
Court should consider Il 80 eleal
that the defendant acted in gooC
faith as to leave no question for tn,
consideration OF the Jury. Mr.. Selden in
sisted that the only alleged ground Of III,
illeEality vt the defendant vote is thai
she is woman that If the same act haC
been done by her brother under the sam,
circumstances it would have been not Onll
innocent but laudable, but being done b,
his client, because she is woman, il i
said 70 be a crime The crime. therefore
consisted not in the act done but in th,
fact that the person doing it was q woman
and not a man He believed that il wa
the first time IN the history of the world il
which a woman had been arraigned in
criminal court merely on account Of he
sex. The right 20 take part in the estab
ll-hmeut ct government i founded in
natural and inalienablc right Of every cit
zen Women have the same interest il
the maintenance Of good government a
men. No greater absurdity, to use m
harsher term, could be presented 10 tn,
human mind than that IT rewardinr mel
and Furnishing women for She same act
without giving woman any voice in ia,
question Of which shall be rewarded anC
which punished He referred to the fac
that all political rights and many persona
rights are denied To- women, and that il il
often said that this Il no disadvantage {,
them because they are represented b,
men. and their rights protected by them
tie spoke ny instances Occurringin his owl
professional life uf the manner in whicl
married women are sometimes protectet
hythls Kind OF representative. when. b,
the inequality " the law. gross iniustic,
had been done TO women. lie referred +.
the changes that had been made in IN,
law by the acts of lS4S and 1860 IN refer
cncc % the rights of married women. an,
the great change the law had undergone i,
the last twenty five years in that respect
and said that these we're great ameliora
tons Of the law, but, said he. How hav
they been produced2 Mainly as the resul
of the eNertiOns of a few heroic women, on,
Of the foremost Of whom is she who stand
before YOU as a criminal to-day. For
thousand years the absurditIes and crudi
ties IN which he alluded have been imbed
dcd IN the Common Law and the Statut
Book, and men have touched them not
and would not have done 50 until the da,
Of final doom had they not been goaded L
u by the persistent efforts of the npbl
women to whom he alluded He insiste,
that the time had come when the civil AM
political rights OF women should be place
upon a perfect equality with those OF men
To make out the ofTense charged agains
the deiendent the prosecution should sho,
nthrmutiyely not only that the deiendan
voted cOnscientiousy without having
right to vote, but that she 50 voted know
ing that she had no right to vote. Tn
word knowing related not to the fact q
voting, but 10 the fact Of the want Of tn
right 20 vote lie referred to many au
u .