Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-12-17

stely upon and after the date of the pas
sage of this act all Indians committing
against the person or properly of another
Indian or other erson and OF the follow
log crimes, namely, murder, manslaugh
ef, rape, assault with. intent to kill,
arson, burglary and larceny, within any
Territory OF the United States ,and either
within or without the Indian reservation,
shall be subject therefor to the laws of
said Territory relating to said crimes
and shall be tried therefor in the same
courts and in the same manner, and
shall be subject to the same penalties as
are all other persons charged with the
commission OF the same crimes respec-
lively, and the said courts are hereby
given jurisdiction in all such cases, and
all such Indians committing any of the
above crimes against the person or prop
erty OF another Indian or other person
within the boundaries of any State of the
United States, and within the limits of
any Indian reservation, shall be subject
to the same laws, tried in the same
courts and in the same manner, and sub
ject to the same penalties as are all other
persons committing any of the above
crimes within the exclusive jurisdiction
of the United States.'
The case of the defendants falls within
the last class of cases provided for by
this law. The counsel for defendants
contend with much earnestness that the
law in question should not be held to
apply to them for the reason, as it is
claimed, that they had no notice of it. If
that view should be adopted by the
court, the plea of guilty of manslaughter
entered by the defendants could not be
permitted to stand, for of course the
court would not enter judgment in a
case of which it had no jurisdiction. The
validity of the act in both of it's
branches was determined by the
Supreme Court in the case enti-
tied United States vs. Kagamo. Its
terms are plain and clearly embraced
the offense for which defendants were
indicted. Congress did not see proper
to provide that the law should not take
Of it's provisions, but on the contrary
enacted that, Immediately upon and
after the date of the passage of the act,
all Indians committing any Of the Of
feuses described within the designated
places, shall be subject to the laws
therein prescribed. Clearly, the Court
CduuOt uOlu tllo law ludppllCaOl0 10 any |
Indian who comes within its provisions
While the offenses committed by the
defendants would, if committed by a !
white man, have Of course been murder,
it may be in view of the Indian nature,
their customs, ignorance and supersti
ton, that in the circumstances
the killing of the doc
tor there was wanting the malice that is
to constitute the crime OF mur-
der. 1t was that view that prompted the
District Attorney to say that he could not
contend for verdict Of guilty Of muir
der and to consent to the withdrawal of
the plea of not guilty and to the entry of
a plea of guilty of manslaughter, and
since justice should be tempered with
mercy, perhaps the Court may be justi-
fed in imposing sentence in being moved
by the same considerations and in inflict-
ing punishment which under ordinary
would be considered too
light for 80 atrocious crime. The judg-
ment of the Court is that the defendants,
and each of them, be imprisoned in the
State prison at San Quentin for the
period of five years from this date, and
pay fine of 81.