Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1882-03-02

Is brought under Revised Statutes, Sec. 5457-
8. The crime charged consists in falsely ma
king, forging or counterfelting coin in the re-
semblance or similitude of coin Of the United
States, or willingly aiding and assisting there
in, and in making or causing TO be made coins
of silver or other metals, or alloys of metals,
intended for the use and purpose of current
money, in the resemblance of coins of the
! United States. In the case of Tie United
States as. Hing, 9Th Mel, 20e, the Court held
that the guilty participation of the defendant
may be inferred from the proof that guam
| titg Of spurious coin, and instruments and
| appliances for making it, We're found in his
| possession, and in the case OF The United
| States as. Burns, 9th Mel, %, the Court
| holds that If the spurious coin, from its IN
completeness, or the Effectiveness OF Its man
ufacture, be not fitted to deceive persons or
| ordinary caution and intelligence, the infer
| ence of criminal intent in making it does
| not arise. s.
From this it appears that to sustain con-
| viction of falsely making coin, the coin made
must be in sufficient state Of perfection to
deceive persons of ordinary caution and in
| teligence; for without this the fact OF a
criminal intent on the part of the defendant
| does not arise, and without such criminal
intent the presumption of false making does
not arise.
The evidence, however, does not alone fail
to establish this fact but it shows atilrma-
lively that the metal found does not bear the
least resemblance or s1mliltude to any coin,
ing of any metal bearing any impress what
ever. On examination of Revised Statutes,
sections 5457 and 545S, ander which the
charges against the defendant are made, we
find that it is provided that an attempt to
pass, utter, publish, or sell false coins, Is
subject for the same punishment as If the
offense had been completed; but in specify
ing what constitutes the crime of falsely
making such coin, the same section wholly
fails to use the word attempt" or any other
equivalent term; but we do find that section
1923 provides as follows:
IN all criminal causes the defendant may
be found guilty of any offense the commits
sion of which is necessarily included in thai
with which he is charged in the indictment
or may be found guilty of an attempt to com
NIT the offense charged: PrOrlded thai
such attempt be itself separate offense."
Nowhere does the statute prescribe any
punishment for attempting to do what was
done by the defendant; how, then, can what
he did constitute All offense for which he can
be held to answer? If coin had been made
by Vaughn, then the defendant, II he haC
assisted i'll falsely making it, might bt
held guilty of the making also; but, as al
ready stated, no false coin has been made
nor is there sufficient evidence to show thu
, attempt on the part Of Vaughn or defendant
The evidence satisfies me that with the IN
strumentS and appliances used by the par
ties, If used at all, no counterfeit none.
{ could be made. and as the defendant canno
be held to answer for falsely making the coil
by reason thereof. he cannot be hefd 70 an
swer for an attempt TO do that what in itsel
, is not separate offense and not liable t.
, punishment.
/ esteem the rights of liberty and to tn
pursuit of happiness guaranteed to ever,
= American citizen too high to deprive evel
, the humblest citizen thereof, unless for sui
ficient cause: such cause do not lind iron
: the evidence to exist in this case. It there
j fere follows that, TO my opinion, the defeldan
is entitled to his discharge, and he is there
: fore ordered to be discharged. The m0lds
metal, and tools found. together with the ev
idence, will be placed in the hands Of the U
S. Attorney. 3. ZWART, C0n'r.
IRONToN, Feb. %, 1882.