The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-03-19

ruled thus II the pOlnC nau Deeu pAeseuUou "
what extent the practice of prosecuting GRIM |
inally by information has been sanctioned;
There was no reason why q practlce tnns
sanctioned, and uninterruptingly prevailing
in ol1r courts from their organization, should /
not have been adopted in initiating this pros
ee1ltion. but we are informed at the bar by
the Attorney General that the Grand Jury,
In place Of finding bill, instructed the prose |
cutting officer to file an information, thus Civ
ING its saction to this prosecution, and for
bearing to initiate it by Indictment solely be.
cause Of some apprehended defect or want OF
power to act after the time had elapsed for
(which the jury was summoned. ,
ground that the selection OF JUrors by coim-
missioners appointed by the judges as a.
rected by the act of 1877, Is illegal, the eonstl-
tuition having prohibited that any duties or
taehed by law to the courts, The act pro-
yides that the judges of five courts of
Orleans parish shall select two jury commits
Sioners, who In their turn shall select, impair
tally, not less than one thousand competent
men as jurors from the citizens Of the parish
having the qualifications requisite to register
as voters. Acts, p. 49, Experience had
demonstrated the necessity. OF some law to
protect the administration Of justice from the
so far departed from the old landmarks
as to admit every man into the jury-box
who could use the ballot: This evil was APP
parent years ago, when Ignorant or vicious
privilege, and it was UNNECESSARILY augment
ed by the changes that have since occurred,
by which the number OF improper persons
eligible to this grave duty has been n mult-
found a solution of the pressing difficulty by
providing for the appointment by the judge
OF commissioners to select given number OF
jurors and our Legislature wisely acted on
that hint and copied the, enactment: 1t
Z ff,J a function annprtain-
ing to the judge OF court, and when
we remember that the same con-
stitution which confines the Supreme and
district courts to the exercise. OF judicial du-
ties confers upon the former the power to Sc
lect it's own clerk, 1t is apparent that an act
OF the Legislature, comforting upon the latter
the power to. select jury commissioners, to
make up o body from which the jurors OF
vention Of its prohibition Of the performance
OF other duties than those which are judicial.
And that this power has not been exercised In
the spirit Of the law, and for the public good,
LIS not pretended.
We have said thus much upon those points
OF the defense which affect particularly the
constitution Of the tribunal, and the kind OF
proceeding by and through which the trial
was had to the end that the rightfulness of
the one and the legality of the other may be
vindicated. We now turn to the investiga-
tion of some Of the alleged defects which the
prisoner claims vitiate the prosecution, and
here 1t is necessary to state succinctly the re-
quirements o. the statutes touching cleo
tlOnS, In order to understand the nature of the
objections.
Three commissioners are appointed for each
poll, whose duty Is to count the vote imme-
diately upon its close; to make duplicate
fcations Of certain details, and deliver one Of
them to the supervisor of registration of the
parish and the other to the clerk Of the Dis
trict Court. The supervisor OF registration,
consolidate such returns, to be certified as cor
rect by the clerk Of the District Court,
and he must forward the consolidated returns,
with the originals received by him, to the
common parlance as the Returning Board,
must meet In New Orleans within ten days
after the closing Of the election, and canvass
and compile the statement of votes made by
Z the commissioners of election. The pre-
siding officer (of this boardl shall open in the
presence Of it's members the statements of
The. commissioners of election, and they
shall from said statements canvass and COM
pile the returns of the election in duplicate,
deposit one In the Office of the Secretary OF
State and make public proclamation Of the
other by printing In O., the official journal
November 20, 1872.
The offense charged in the information is
altered public record, to v Wit: t the returns
-frofn the narish Of Vernon, as shown by the
original returns OF said election made by the
supervisor of election.
When the State offered in evidence the
on the ground that It did not conform to the
description contained in the information; or,
In other words, that it was not the record for
the uttering and publishing OF which, altered
and forged. hewas criminally charged. There
upon the State moved to amend by striking
out the words "OrigiMdl returns" and insert
ing "consoiidated statement of uotes, parish of
Vernon" in lieu thereof, and by striking out
the words supervisor of election" and in
sorting in their stead "supervisor Of registra-
ton"
The amendment was permitted and the trial
proceeded on the information as amended,
anda bill was reserved. We do not propose
to consider the right to amend because the sit
uation OF the accused, though changed, YVES
improved by the substitution and his chances
of escape increased. The document was again
offered in evidence under the amendment and
received.
Whenever forgery of an instrument or the
uttering OF a forged instrument is charged,
and the instrument has legal definition and
meaning-that is to say, has certain charac-
teristics or qualities impaired to it by law-it
is not needful to set it forth in the informa-
eral or legal term by which it is known suffi-
GENTLY designates the kind of instrument
meant. Thus a bond or will is an instru-
ment known to the law, and the law dictates
WudG SlIStll US huOWu dllu H6lu w Uc h DOuu OE
q will. But when statute provides for an
instrument, not known to the law hitherto, or
in other words, creates it and impresses upon
it certain features peculiar to itself, forgery
cannot be committed by making false stat
ntory one in form not provided by the stat
ute, even though it be so like the genuine one
as to deceive most persons, and the uttering
OF such false and altered instrument would
not be punishable. 2 Bishop Criminal Law,
sec SOC.
Under our statute it is only necessary to
set out the purport of any instrument, or to
designate it by name,ssif it is usually known
by one in an indictment for forging, utter
order to be forgery the instrument thus set
out and charged to be feloniously made, must
be OF such character that, il genuine, it would
be evidence Of the fact it recites. The instru-
ment must be such that, when forged, it does
other, or, as put by Bishop, it must either
appear on its face to be, or it must in fact be,