Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1883-10-16

CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORITY OFER ELECIIONS.
Another interesting case, involving war
legislation, was also decided by the court
to-day, namely, the case of the United
States against E. Z. Gale and VIM. S.
Gibson, brought here on certificate of divi-
sion from the circuit court Of the United
States, district CT Florida. This was q
suit against the supervisor and clerk of
election Of district No. 8, in Marian county,
Florida, on occasion OF the election Of
congressional representative in 1873. The
Indictment charged the defendants with
misconduct as election officers in stuffing
ballot box with fraud
ulent tickets, and sabstrscting
tickets which had been voted. The de-
fense was that sections 5512 and 5515,
revised statute, uoon which the indiot-
ment was based, and section go, under
which was chosen the grand jury by which
the Indictment was found were unconsti-
tutional and void. The court disposed OF
the first part of the defense very briefly,
by saying: 'The question of the validity
OF sections 5512 and 5515 have already
been decided by this court in the case of
Siebold & Clark, 100 o. s., 81, 399. and
was determined in favor of their validity.
section $50, upon what the second part of
the defense was based, con-
tains a statement of causes for
disqualification and challenge
of grand and petit jurors in the courts of
the United States as follows: Without
Guress or coercion to have taken up arms,
10 have joined any Instruction or rebel
lion against the United States, TO have ad-
hered to any Instruction or rebellion,
given it aid and comfort, etc. L in pan
cling the grand jury which found the in
dictment against the defendants tour psr-
sons otherwise competent were excluded
from the panel for causes mentioned IN
this section. The court, after review of
the circumstances, as shown By the record,
declines to decide whether section 500 is
valid or not; fer the reason that the ques
ton of the constitutional grand jury under
that section will be raised IN due time.
The court, however, gives brief history
of this law excluding from justice persons
who took part III the late instruction, and
comments upon it as follows: st may be
proper to call attention to the singular po-
sition of this section (section 500. Ii was
originally enacted as q section of an act
passed June 18th, 1862, entitled an act for
defining the different causes for challenge,
and prescribing an additional oath for
grand and petit jurors in United States
courts. Twelfth statute of 1883. At
that time (1S62), it was, no doubt, very
proper and necessary law, but after the
rehabilitation of the insurgent states, the
proclamation of general amnesty and
the act OF the fourteenth amendment,
guaranteeing equal rights to all citizens of
b.
have been no just reason for continuance
of the law, especially as By far the largest
portion of citizens in the states lately in
rebellion would be disqualified under it.
Accordingly by the fifth section of the act
commonly called the enforcement act,
passed April 20, 1871, az stat. 15) con-
gress, after providing that in prosecutions
under the act, no person should be grand
or petit juror who should in the judgment
of 1.-The to1rt b, in completely with
any combination or conspiracy
punishable by the provisions thereof, re-
pealed said section of the act of '62, and
the law remained in this state until adop-
ton of the revised statutes. For some
unexplained reason the revisars reported
the section back again into the revised
statutes as section $50. Although it had
not been in force for more than two years,
it is probable fact its repeal was over
looked by congress when the revision was
adopted and it is to be hoped their atten-
ton will be called to it. The questions
certified by the court below are answered
by this court as follows:
''It is the opinion of this court and It SO
decides, that the question whether sections
5,512 and 5.515 of the revised statutes Of
the United States are repugnant to, and
in violation of tie constitution Of the
United States, should be answered il the
negative. That as TO the question as to
the validity of section $50 of said revised
statutes, it is unnecessary to be decided.
inasmuch as objection to constitution of
the grand jury was not raised in due time,
and that the remaining question.
namely, whether the judgment
OF this court could be rendered
against defendants Oh an Indictment found
by grand jury impanelled and sworn
under the section aforesaid, and whether
the Indictment aforesaid charges any
offences for which Judgment could be rem
dered against defendant, and this court
under the constitution and laws Of the
United States, should be answered in the
affirmative. Opinion by Justice Bradley.
MoRaioNs RAMPANT.
Gov. Murray, OF Utah, who has just
sent report to the secretary OF the ipte-
rior,states there has long existed in Utah 2
combination to nullify the laws o. con-
gress. This conspiracy led to open REBEL
ion ct one time, and continues to eTade
and defeat the plain will of congress He
urges that congress take some action to Sc
cure good government and not rely upon
slime and railroads. to effect the desired re
form. He goes on 70 speak Of the dau-
gers OF another irrepTessible conflict, and
says that the militia Of the territory is not
available. He recommends the United
States military be made available and that
it be made lawful for the United States
soldiers to be used for the
execution of process out of courts of the
United States in the hands of United States
marshals, and that their services under
proper restrictions, in case of riot, jnsur-
rection, domestic violence, and for preser-
vation of the peace, be made more readily
effective than under the present laws.
The report states that the unlawful terri
torisl governments which for over thirty
years existed in the face of congress and
the country, exists to-day. The unanimity
and universally with which the commits
sions of officials appointed by the gov