New-York tribune., 1873-06-18
PRICE FOUR GEMS.
WOMAN'S SUFFRAGE.
A TEST CASE.
SUSAN n. ASTHoSY on TRIAL FOR yoT1NG-JoD'S
sELDEN's ARGUMENT IN HER BEHALF

|
indicted for youug IN violation OF law at the C1y OF
Rochester the last November general election was
called 10 the Circuit United States now IN
session In this village, az .. to-day. The defendant
personally appeared IN court accompanied by Mrs, Ma
da J. Gage and other ladies, and represented by
her counsel Henry T. Selden ard John Van yo0rhp of
Rochester Richard Crowley, tAttorney repre-
sented the United States jury was empaoeled with
out diGcuty the Government exercising the right OK
challenging once, and the dofendent three tines.
The. District Attorney made brief statement OF the
facts on which he relied for conviction, and which
were charged in the Indictment " that Miss Anthony
voted the last election for the Congressiona cand
date for the Twenty District and for the Congress
man at large" 1t conceded that the deiehdant
was, on the 5th OF November. 1872. woman
Beverly W. James sworn by the Government as
a witness and testified That he knew the defendant
that he inspector OF Election 10 the bgh'h
Ward. First District of the City Of Rochester;
that Miss Anthony voted the Congressional, state
and Assembly ticket at that poll; That he
put the ballots in the boxes where they respect
lively belonged that Miss Anthony not challenged
that he was the Board of Registry; that the de-
appeared before the Board and claimed the night
be regstced that objection made as to her right
to vote; that the Board decided that she entitled
to and registered her name; that one OF the Federal
Supervisors OF Election present and advised
tho Inspectors that the defendant entitled
to he registered and they did it; that Miss Anthony
States Constitution and under the state law she
claimed the right the Fourteenth Amendment; tho
of the defendant appeared on the pOl!s IS num-
ber 2 and It also appeared that she voted toe Electoral
state, Congress, and Assembly tickets.
In opening the defense, Judge sedcn claimed that tho
case OF great magnitude and interest not only
to the defendant but the whole people. When the
defendant claimed her 10 be registered and 10 vote,
she was as much entitled 10 both Of those rights
as any man, and when she voted If sha
fully believed that she had right TO vote she commit
ted 10 crime The question for the jury whether
she did fn good faith believing that she had right
vote Judge selden then stated that for the second
time in hs professional life he compelled to Offer
himself a witness in behalf Of his client. Being sworn.
he testified that before the defendant voted she called
on him for advice her right to y0te that he took
time examine the question and dId very carefully,
aud that he then advised her that size "as much
voter as any other man; ;" that he believed then
that she had legal right TO vote, aud he believed
now, aud on that advice she voted.
The defendant then offered herself witness on her
behalf the subject of intent and good faith. The
DstrictAttorncy objected to her competency 40 testify
IN her behalf and the objection sustained Tho
defense then rested John Z. Pound then sworn by
the prosecution. He testified that the examination
before Commissioner stOrr the defendant stated that
she should have offered to II she had not had
Judge salden's advce that she had not particle OF
doubt Of her right 10 vote.
proceeded to address the Court and jury in
hausiye argument, occupying nearly three hours IN s
delivery He enunciated three propositions: First:
election in question second, If she was not so entitled
but believed that she so, and voted in good lath
that belief such voting does not constitute criminal
ofTense under the statute; aud third that she did
in such belief and In good faith. He said that
the two first questions for the Court
and the last for the jury, nnless the Court
should consider clear that the defendant acted in
good faith leave question for tho consideration
OF the jiry. Mr. Selden insisted that the only alleged
ground Of ilegaity Of the defendants that
she is u woman that the same act had been done by
her brother under the circumstances it wouG hyo
not only innocent but audabe, but being done by
his client, because she is WOmau il is SAID TO be
crime The crime therefore consisted not IN the act
DONE but in the fact that the person dong
IL was woman aud not a man. He b,-
lleved that It was tho first time in the history
OF the world in which woman had been arraigued In
criminal court merely on account OF her The right
to take part in the establishment Of government Is
founded in natural and inaienabe right Of every cit
izen. Women have the same interest III the Inante-
nance OF good government men, No greater absurd
iy to use no harsher term, could be presented to le
human mind than that OF rewardng men and punshing
women for the same act, without giving woman any
voice In the question Of which shall be rewarded and
which punished. He referred 70 the fact that all pot
ical rights and many personal rights arc denied 10
and that IL is Oiten slid tbat t5 II no osad-
vantage them because they represented by mcu.
and their rights protected by them. He spoke OF IN
stances occurring In his professional life OF tle
manner in which Trarred wopon are sometimes pro-
teced by this t,ld OF representatives, when by the
inequality law injustice had been done 20
women He referred to the changes nat had been ma
in the law by the acts OF and In reference TO tho
rights OF married women and the great change the law
had undergone IN the years that respect and sait
that these we're great ameloratons Of the law, bu,
said he How have they been produced Mainly
the result OF the exertons OF few heroic women
of the foremost OF whom she who stands before you
aa a criminal to-day For thousand years the absur.
dtties nnd crudIties which he alluded have been
bedded In the Common Law and the Statute Book, audi
men have touched them not and weuld not have done
30 until the day OF final doom hsd they not been goaded
10 IL by tho persistent efforts OF the noble to
whom be alluded. he insisted that the time had
when the civil and political rights OF women should bo
placed upon o perfect equality with those OF men.
To make out the o6ense charged against
thoS defendant, the prosecution should show
afrrnatiyely only that the defendant voted con-
scienousy without having right 10 vote, but that she
40 voted knowing that she had right to vote. Tho
word knowing related TO the fact OF voting but
the fact OF OF the right to VOTE He referred
20 many authorities on this pOns. Great emphasis
given 70 the right Of TO vote as secured by tho
Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments Of the Federal
Constitution, aud learned and exhaustive exposition
was given two articles as bearing upon tho
question Tho remarks OF Judge selden were extended
on the point a. the knowledge Of the defendant that
abe WAS committing Illegal act, and severely criti-
cised several cases bearing upon that part of his rgu
ment.
Retsrriur 20 the case OF the People sst Hamilton re-
oortad in 81 Barb he characterized IL outrageous
aud said that the judges who pronounced that decision