New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1874-04-01

there ought 10 be provision OF law to this effect that
in all tired before court and Jury, ON question
alleged fraud upon the revenue II shall be the duty
OF the Court 70 submit to the jury as distinct propose
ton; Were the parties gny OF 1b actual rv @eh, 10 Ge
that the parties were guilty, there should ne no
power OF remission wnatever but when 1t Is found that
there actual intent to defraud the penalty shall be
enforced by way of example This rule should apply to
all where the Judge feels bound to direct verdict
just alluded to-, Where the Judge should say say
TO the jury, when directing the verdict. Gentlemen
obliged, question OF law TO say that the statute
has been violated and that there must be verdict for
the Government YET You are to % retire and determine
spoke Of had been charged il never would have found
the parties guilty.
word knowingly IN the statute of the words with
intent TO defraud the revenues " cover the case
Mr.. DAys-Perhaps II would, but yet IL would be open
to question IT, however, You provide that on the trla
of such the judge shall submit the question OF
tua fraud 10 the jury even IN cases whore he IL bound to
direct verdict Tor the Government yOu will save the
whole thing Then, the jury find that there fraud
the Secretary should have no power over the be-
cause then he would be reviewing the verdict of jury
Mr. BEcK-In the case to which you have just referred
in which the judge directed the jury 10 md verdict for
the United States did he also direct the Jury pass on
the question OF actual fraud
Mr.. DAvIs-No, Sir not at all said that il the Judge
had done so in that case the verdict would have been
different The courts are bound, in enforcing statutes
10 order verdcts III cases where the parties knowingly
do the acts which are violation Of the statute. We
have just had case IN our own state OF that KIND.
poor man. who was entirely out Of enplOym had
friend who had been appointed Inspector of elections
Our statute provides that II any person. not being in
or votes he shall be guilty OF felony. Now the
who actually appointed inspector though. that he
could help his friend by having hiu do the duty ana
receive the compensation. He went 10 lawyer, who
drew the power OF attorney providing that in the
OF TINS nis party the second party should and act
as inspector and perform all the duties OF that Office
The man went and attended 10 the duty. acting fairly
enough and nobody found any fault with hun until
about the middle OF the afternoon. He had acted SO
WELL seems that the Chairman OF the Judges OF Flee
ton, wheh ne went 10 dinner appointed him temporary
Chairman. Then somebody who To the polls SAID
he was not the man who was appointed inspector Tno
al 4. no IN.
know that that Is not my real name but am acting
under power OF attorney Ihls was indicted for
felony and the Judge submitted TO the Jury simply the
question whether he dd the act Of putting IN ballots
aud vii ether he knew III dong tnc ur, OF course
tine Jury found that the guilty The ease went
10 the General Term and the General Term vas Obliged
to affirm the decision below. Bat we al united
In asking the Governor 10 pardon him, winch
the Governor Immediately did. That lilastraios
the position III which the courts are sometime
put in regard 10 the enforcement OF statutes.
FOR that reason I have made the suggesti0n, 70
aIneOrate the bardsbps of The case, that where
IL bound ~ direct verdict because the forbidden
has been knowing done by the party without his
ing or considering the and Its equeIees, sui
yer plain violation Of rcvfDne statue. tic oouri