National Republican., 1881-11-07


chareed that the object Of the conspiracy was 70
commit each and every, all and singuIar; me
the State prison. The court say further:
All crimes nre not so punishable Whether par
lieu er crime be such one or not is question otiaw
cat on OF the charge against him in this respect in
order lhat he may decide whether he should present
aud the court that It may determine whether the iacls
VIII sustain Inc Indictment Omitted States W CrulS
There can beno general Indictment ofconspirocy
to dcfraud the United States, but the Indictment
must be or conspiracy to defraud in some particl-
nelt or Information must show the means 70 pe
used.
In expounding penal statute the court certainly
Will not extend u beyond the plain meaning OF iis
words for has been long and well settled shnt suon
tntutc3 must be construed strictly (Uned states W.
MOins II Pet, f5)
call attention again to the case Of Lamb vs., The
People lreported Ia the Legal News, oct. 2 1851,
pages Is and 1g), where the court said;
SO, where he has entered into a conspiracy with
others TO commit felony or other crime, under such
elrcnmstances as Will when tested by sxperienr.ee ne.
he n,st he presumed TO have understood the con-
How from carrying Into effect such unlawfnl com.
bnntlon and also to have nssented 70 the doing OF
to accomplish the objects of me con piracy even 70
the taking oflife But further than this the law does
not 60
IL is for this reason insist that the information
must set out the whole scheme Of the conspiracy;
otherwise IL Is impossible for the court to say
the conspiracy, and consequently 10 determine
whether the other conspirators nre bound by that
act Because Il II is an act not calculated to FUR.
ther the conspiracy the other conspirators nre not
bound, although they may have entered into tho
conspiracy.
or the accused in such case hns not expressly as-
scented TO the commission the crime and the unlaw-
~ enterprise is not fsuch character rs Will proba.
into execution, there can be no. implied assent aud
consequently no criminal liability. The principle
is the elementary and very familiar doctrine, applica
bic alike to crimes and mere cv injuries that every
person must be presumed 10 intend and Is accordingly
held Responsible i9r the Iyobabie consequences Of his
into an agreement with Others to do au unlawful act
he impedly nsscua to the use OF such means by his
the Accomplishment Of an act of Thai Character hut
beyond this his implied liability cannot be extended"
We must understand the scope of the conspir-
acy. We must understand the scheme In all It's
parts. In an idictment for presenting a fraudu-
lent pension claim, brought under See. 5i35 X. s.,
IL was held by Dyer, j.:
1t will be observed that the gst Of the oense as we
payment of false or fraudulent claim. The indlc-
how he rand was nor Wherein
dne claim was iaiss except that the defendant pre-
by virtue OF pension certificate which had been
theretofoTe procred upon false and fraudulent proofs
authority OF law What the false and fraudulent
proofs and unlawful and fraudulent devices were Is
That Is the trouble with this information. The
subue devices" are not set out hero. Perhaps
they were too subtle" to be put in writing. The
court says further:
The question Is; Are these allegations sufficiently
certain, and do they contain statements OF ict which
VIII support II cOnvlCtionf
THE PARTY IN THAT CASE
was indicted for obtaining pension by false and
fraudulent papers. In this case II is charged that
certain false and fraudulent papers were used |;
that the accused rcsorted to unlawful and corrupt
means and TO certain false and fraudulent devices
but the gentlemen on the other side do not have
the kindness 10 state what the means were, except
10 Hny" by means of unlawful illppnl fraudulent
papers," They do not have the Kindness TO state
wherein the illegality consisted. The court, after
referring TO the opinion in the case OF United
statesv Watkins 3Cranch c.. Rep, AL 456-7-s-9,
goes on TO says:
But It is undoubtedly sound principle that an in
requisite particularly wherein the fraud consisted,
% and the means by which Il was effected, and have
application OF this rule. . The fraud should
have been by apt allegation more particularly denti-
led II should have been alleged what the proofs and
devices were
That Is our case
and wherein they were frauduent and It is, in my
DEVICES resorted towhether ut tho time of present
the basis for obtaining The pension certificate
II was necessary to show the alleged fraud and the
fore necessary that IL should be alleged least with
sIsen Sens eny to enable Lhe defendant
a subsequent prosecution for the same ofense.
:. Irefer also to United States vs. Goggin-Legal
News January 81, 1880, page 173.
The means proposed to be used TO effect a criminal
purpose are not In al cases, TO be set out and
IN Sr All II M cases. ceggred to be nor are they
spiracy. 10 certain extent the rules upon the sub
unlawful agreement of two or more per1tons 10 do
criminal act which Is well known and recognized
and dears L By hS y Sy Sy %d y
iamiliarly known the nature Of the oense Is clearly
commit the oHense describing il IN general terms, w
combination be to do an act which is not nawn,l IN
nseii Dy M the use or unlawful means those must be
Remember that the acts which Brady did were
lawful II was lawful for him TO increase the
number of trips or TO expedite the service The
acts he did were absolutely lawful and within his
The question of doubt and upon which there arc
conflicting aut critics Is the case OF conspiracy 10 dc
Guiding the denomination ofwronsful acts those
which are lawful because they are In violation o
common law The purpose of Cheating and de-
fraudng,n which IS the case now before us, does not
offense either AT common law or by statute Ii may
Gh%S GG o Me e. bs are II y%o
h 9e to I nsIlce not by 5dioment but by clvp tlon
known common law oSnsc II punisSaSey S'y AZ ali I@s q
Q crime Z IS only when the cheat is effected
such an object Of fconspracya criminal act the com
hnation Or agreement must be to cheat and deiraud
IN some OF the modes made criminal by statute; and
the indictment must contain allegations which show
@ saeh che SSe ana Sa agreed tp are
theS & would ne punishable as a criminal ofense.
section $40 Reysei Statutes requires some act to ;,
done by one of the conspirators to complete the OF
splrators to effect the object OF the unlawful agree
ment all parties to the agreement may withdraw ant
net ali arei TO the penalty. ! Someact b,
sSe g s n, s9w
ment, while snbs!sting, became operative (Unte,
States v. Donan OF al II Dlaich., 1867
That, understand, Is the law. They must SCI
1ul" but why; not simply that It Is Improper
but why; not simply TINT 1t was "extravagaut'
but why; not that this party resorted TO papers dc
signed to corrupt and nislead, but why, aud mus
show the rapers so calculated To corrupt and mis-
lead. have shown what they must do Now lie
me call attention TO the alidayis made In thi
case have shown that the information itself 4
contradictory and absurd, as far as II relates tom!
Now, what are the aiidayils? take up Grst II,
affidavit of Mr. James. The court has heard /
read; There Is one thing IN this affidavit whlcl
Mr.. James states of his own knowledge: +" Person
ally appeared before me, &c., Thomas L. James
who, being duly sworn, Sc, says that he Is Post
maser-GeneIai Of tie United States" Good
ADMIT IT.
tLaughterl "That he has read the foregoing in
forination"-I admit that" und knows that tn
contents thereof, and that the same are true as h
states upon information and belief" that hi
knowledge, Information, and belief are derive,
from an examination OF the records of said Depart
ment, including the orders aud papers relating +
the various matters set forth In The said infOrina
ton Including the increases OF service and OF cx
peditoi, the reduction of service the offer 10 sure
ties, aud the change Of route, the position aud
ton OF Brady, French, and Turner (nOthing ahuu
Browi). ana also from the reports and statement
male ~ hlm by the Inspectors and other agent
and officers OF the Post. oAice Department, VIII
have, by his direction, been engaged for man
months In careful examination aud inyeStigutio
&c.
WHAT HE SAYS, THEN, Is THIS;
that he hNs read the information and that til
contracts aud papers referred to there arc in hl
Office Good; Also, that he has employed per
sons To look into this matter and they have rc
ported 10 him. nsk the gentlemen on the otllC
side, Is that evldenceY Is II such evidence Il
Thomas l.. Jnmes would be allowed 10 give hetor