, 1874-02-27
THE GAGE CASE;
Motion to Quash the Second Perjury
indictment Argued.
The Matter Taken Under Ad-
yisc1ncnt by the Court.

NlsCAAsCAo ~ tAo SOAAts
:
-
H. nsrtfr Gives Eotice That Change Of Tenut
A'' ,,..,, n. 4a,,1 IN 4hn e+b,,-1,l;.t,n..
ha' ~ n"A'1 w NV '''@~% 4AA''tA1'1''
7bo motion to duash the second indictment
...;,,t Darjd A. Gaeo for periury VAS arp1,af
.*ons Indoa sro,-a :, +ha cr;.,;;,.,
u;t,, I'm arcnntion ~ +1rantv or +,,;-+,
tons n."o,z ~ t1,o ls1al fraternitv thara u,ers
@el4t tsa rarsons nresent md 1;ttin interest W.
'e1' So, - The nrocaedinga ho1an ~ n
na1ul .a,u4,.
se1o~A m awr7r
tor ,1,a defens, hog,r tba e-o,,o,or;
sfp 1ot;on IN onasb tba ;,d;ctrnort o.
,,,ot ,bo Indictment sbo,,1d ha ,r,aaho5
eN'IIs. ,o,,a hit It had s,va,dv j., ~ haas
~ s.,5 -. ~ 7naco norera Tba anh; act.ras+ta
eo 49, s.r,s and mn new facts uaro .1taaoa
1-' ..'an ~es5 ertracts from, 4ha 7e.;s;oH -.
-,". pooora .,o,r;,o +ha+ th;a ;.a;....st
1...1. p, - ,rasba5 $or 49, 80. ...-.--
va. va, .L .ho 49,. mn w,s r7v,zh.a :. :. 0@''
lD.. ~, noa, ha~s ;,tarr,.,.o<1 ~
MI 'sea 1e n1' o"otA ~ say
That the h1ss 1noleEment STATED that he was re-
CURED By the law to make oath to the account
t1Af
.,,rod hs 1np to r.nder The aecoY,nt ~, that d,v
IEe ne" inoleenent se1 1ortn inst both the osth
md the account Wefo required On that daJ.
Hero short argument Erose On the wording
n, the TWO ind:crmouts. LII. Ryett ho1dinr
w. ,1,ar cot fnrth a1acf1v tin ea-,a faetz ~
Inv 'Do 49, s'4-.e 'AeN'' "Ao
rust consequently heano or 1aA together'
AR- REED IN DOUBT ..
Mr. Reed then said that he did not feel sure
na. asa Nv ~ ca,n,,t.a,,n. 49, 80 e.t oos
fsoanueu W tne Soolps1oi4e1 On tne OH, ano
ttat he hardly expected to-in fact,
te guessed he couldn't this
f.os On trial, but this was not
essential. Tho indictment set forth the
fac of Violation OF me law and It Was not neces.
sa1y to show that he could prove the fact, That
would come out on ttial. II he WEE required to
set forth in the Indictment the facts which In
eon1d move. bo did not e1ncct to draw anv IN.
soaia ploHe' 10 ~ ~ o1ge'' " oi1" anS ~
oletment Wnlcn WOULD seano- 49,.
11r. Reed then read the portions Of two indict-
ueats where there YVES -" -
nTrsprrcr nT7rurr,, .r,,, r,e,r,r,,,,,,n.,
-, - -. - =, -, =, - :.
Ill. 81" s'ateo that the nfst indictments "as
plain statement Of certain facts, whi1c the
second Vas an argument q speech, and q legal
conclusion from tie game facts, but gave no
1eE ones. He then proceeded to argue the case
b.arng particularly upon Indictments for per-
jur7. =: .>-
Nr. 6wett further c1Aimed that Mr. Gage, hay
irg been required by Law to take an oath On q
certain day relative to the State Of the Treasury
on that day, could not be held to have committed
pajury for taking an oath in itself not required
bylaw, On day which would nullify it even il
ths cath had been required - :r':~ . '
LEGALITY or TIE Oath. a. ~: l..
III. Reed hero inquired whethar the Comp
4Hnht4~ e@11I {HAH MI.
ranth for swoEn statement Of the account Oh
tie lst day OF that month
Mr. 6wett replied that he Thought not. He
then stated his position thus That even it it
night he 3 legal oath when specially called upon
fe tbs awo1n account on a particular
tsy, up to that day, il cartainlY
hsd nothing to DO with this case where
he Treasurer was not called upon ut MI: but
Voluntarily made oath on day not required by
hs, 70 state OF the Treasury Oh previous
f'E. AZ. Heed hoWaTer, claimed that be could
nsurP the functions OF the Court By drawing a.
Legal conclusion, and saying that sho 1aw re-
CURED the taking OF the oath in such and aueh
> way: The Court .Was always presumed to
now the law, and to be, able to draw the legal
sonelnslon ,k fron-the1scts presented*
hld noTeI been, required By Law, whether taken
q the 9th or the LIST Of the month tie then
eao:sd The statute dohnine perjury, and the
ha:utes oaAlng Tor the taxing OF Inc pa5efc15af
Su1 upoA "t1t11 Pe1Ju5 naa 1ue6Iu- :41S
ata taken, not having been required by
my OF these statutes no action Tor perjury
could oo maintained. lis oath, taken on tho
t.a OF December, set toEth tAat he hAd on hand
he sum OF *l,llo, i1o.4s, "hen, IN 1aet, nc o,d
1ot have TINS amount Il n hana- NOW the statute
q oa not require an oath TO that eject, put only
.hss @ the account rendered vas . 1alr, accurate,
al aoa exact M statement OF; ne m2neya onaIgeahe
to him as Treasurer; and further, that ho had
not used olreGIiy or inureetly tne anoFe-men,
no1ea 10 Sum His st9tement m o. account shoVed
1ce money On haac a. lho: 6eS1nnthe Of me
month. tie money received aud ne money paid
Sas, Hath simple ~ opesaon IL a.asame1ie SNOW
tns ta ne oa1aoee. 10 th's nc s"oro tnas " Nas
la1 just, aud aecufate account OF mo moneys
'ecel7ed aud PAD ont BY hlm.
~. ,o.,, ;. 81 sgt TT e pIp IT, for FOLLOW, o,
no: could IT be hold, that h9 sWore TO any such
.ang. The latter part Of ne oath was upoD the
re- B conceoodiy repemea statute.
aae ,[s isx o. 1ses, when special spot Of deposit
Gss u.s. naea 1of re eley iunas, mace u
unalJ onense 70 remove them thererom. NoH
.ae same - Il" required, necessarily, IN oatn 20
w aa'nRs hInt toat oo has cnatgeaple VIZ
~ sh u a1nount ana second, tnat ne sctuauy
|