The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1883-01-18
PRINCE EDWARD.
COUNTY COURT-TRIALs or TWO ELECTION
CASES ALLEGED TO BE ILLEGAL.

COUNTY tOUkI-IklAIS VI 1hO
CASES ALLEGED TO BE ILLEGAL.
Correspondence of the Richmond Dispatch.l
FARMyILLE, January Is, 1888.
The County Court (Judge Crutej has been
in session for day or two. In the Com
monwea.th Us. Young the following facts
were brought out in the testimony: The
accused voted in Prince Edward at the late
November election. Hc presented a transfer
from Nansemond county TO the Prince Ed
ward officer, and was regularly registered.
When ne appeared at the polls in NOvem-
Der evidence of the prepayment OF the cap
itation-taX OF 1881 was required by the
Judges Of election. When the treasurer's
receipt was produced witness testified
that it was dated 1850 in print, but with
the figure 81 " across the cypher in ink,
so as to read 1881 and his vote was re-
ceived. Suspicion appears to have been
aroused that the receipt was forgery. posi-
bly, without foundation (and as the defendant
alleged). Being Il stranger to some OF the
officials. the question was asked Of him as
to the nature OF business. His reply was
that he was ga preacher, teacher, and 4
politician" He Is, in fact, the pastor Of a
colored church, and was till March, 1880,
stationed at Wytheville, and from that date
TO March. 1882, at Suffolk, from whence he
was at the latter date transferred to Farm
vile. At the November or December
term he was indicted by the grand
jury, under the provision OF the Code
Up. 1G7, Az which declares that
whoever, not Icing 4 qualified elector,
votes at any election with an unlawful
intent, shall be deemed guilty of felony,
and on conviction thereof shall be pun
ished by Imprisonment in the penitentiary
for not less than one month nor more than
one year." The commissioner OF the reve-
nue. and also the assistant treasurer Of
Nansemond were witnesses, and proved
that the accused, on the 1st day OF Novem-
Der, 1881, at his own request, was assessed
IN that county for 1850, and paid the taxes
OF 1880 on that day. They further proved
that he had never been assessed for 1881 or
paid the tax for 1881 in Nansemond.
After an able and full argument for
the prosecution by Mr.. Edgar Al
Ian, the attorney for the Common
wealth, and by p. w. Mckinney, Esq,
for the accused, the jury returned YER
dict OF guilty, and ascertained his term Of
imprisonment in the pententiary at three
months. An application was made for an
arrest OF judgment by learned counsel,
(who has given his client faithful, Jealous,
and able defence,) and mainly 'on the
ground that the people-the soyeregns
who make and unmake constitutions-at
the November QSS2) election had by a
large majority voted repeal OF the
constitutional provision which made the
prepayment OF the cepitation-taX n requisite
for voting; that the Indictment. and es-
pecially the trial Of the accused. was had
after the vote in November, and that this
fact operated as relief TO the accused OF
the liability and penalty sought TO be en-
forced. The point was sustained, rs coun-
sci argued, by decisions OF the Supreme
Court, and especially by case in 1917,
which had been referred to and approved by
subsequent decisions. The court takes
time to consider the defendants motion.
Another election case excited some In
terest. In the Commonwealth Us. Hagan
the defendant &as indicted under the 10th
section Of chapter s (page 1861 Of the Code,
in which it is declared whosoeyer know
ingly votes In any election district in
which he does not actually reside >
shall be guilty OF a misdemeanor," DC. 1t
was In proof that the defendant was regis
tered. by transfer, In Prince Edward in
September, 1882; was then and is now n
student of the Theological Seminary, and
came from Augusta county In September.
IL further appeared that he stated all
the facts 10 the judges, and il they
deemed him q qualified voter he
would offer to vote; that the United
States supervisor and one Of the judges
stated their opinion that be was not q