The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1888-04-18
District Attorney Sellers and the Attorney
General Speak for the Prosecution, and
Senator Voorhees, for the Prisoners.
Probability that the Tenor Of the Courts
Decision Will Be Made Known To-Day.
4 Prosperous and FlOurishing Reformer-
Chester r. Faulkner Resigns His Position
in the Pension Bureau-Capital Notes.
CoY-BERNHAnrER.

Conclusion of the Argument Before the Su-
preme Court-Dectsion Expected To-Day.
Special the Indianapolis journal
WAsHINeToN, April I7-At 12 o'clock to-day
the argument in the Supreme Court which was
begun yesterday, on the motion for writ OF err
ror and habeas corpus in the Coy-Barnhamer
tally-sheet forgery case from Indianapolis was
resumed, United States District Attorney Sell
lers speaking first. He made careful review
of the merits of the and the proceedings in
the courts below. and held that all were regular,
and that tie federal courts had jurisdiction.
Senator Voorhees, followed for the prisoners.
He delivered an eloquent appeal and a we-con-
densed argument in thirty minutes. against the
form of indictment and the jurisdiction of the
federal courts He declared that there
more effort made to control the election of Con-
gressman than there the Bulgarian crown;
that it was not charged in the Indictment or
elsewhere that candidacy for u federal Office was
affected by the alterations made in the tally
sheets; that the word intent does not occur
in the Indictment. whereas the section OF
the Revised Statutes OF the United States
under which the indictment was drawn makes
this requirement. He thought it would be
Inarkable for federal court TO assume jurisdic-
tion in an offense against the State laws. He
elaborated on the point that neither in the State
nor federal laws were there punishments pre-
rcribed nor it forbidden that election officers
might temporarily part with returns before the
time when they were to be delivered to the
vassers
Attorney-general Garland raised the point
that this was here in an irregular way He
inquired, in the beginning of his argument,
whether, in point of fact, it was appeal from
tbs Circuit Court It was an appeal from JUS
tice Harlan and appeal from Judge Gresham
81 want to know" said he, "where this thing is
going TO end7 We have here appeals from
courts ana individual members of it. What au-
thorIty was there for either Judge Gresham or
Justice Harlan to hear an appeal by prisoners if
the federal court had not jurisdctonf But
there is no longer any ground upon which to
raise the question of jurisdiction Il is not
fundamental a constitutional question,
but of whether Congress has given
the federal courJ for Indiana jurisdiction
to hear and determine cause involving fed
eral statutory provision covering crime against
the United States. You cannot convert a writ
of habess corpus into writ of error, and vice
versa" The Attorney general held that officers
of election where Congressman voted for
became United States commissioners, or agents
of federal government and that that authority
such officers till their official duties were at
an end A conspiracy to get possession of those
papers was conspiracy against the federal gov
ernment and there no question about the
United States courts having authority to pun
ish consplrators. The election papers mutilated
at Indianapolis were the property of the State
of Indiana and the federal government, and the
laws of the latter were as accessible as those of
the former to punish an offense against them.
The laws require that those elsetion papers
shall be kept intact Those papers were
not deposited within easy access of men
who altered them for amusement. or for
wrapping paper. but for q purpose; the result
of their being placed there a crime sThe
officers who parted with the papers," said he.
were responsible for the crime. The clerk of
this court has authority to leave his papers
at my Office, where l or the officers of the De-
partment of Justice see and compare them
or handle them, and il he does he is respou-
sible for any crime committed upon them"
Judge McNutt replied TO OF the points
raised by the Attorney general, and the argu-
ment closed.
District Attorney Sellers said to the Journal
correspondent, Immediately after the argument,
that decision the question involving the
liberty or imprisonment of the prisoners may
be made to- morrow, although final decision
aud his wife left for Indianapolis this evening
Before leaving he said he had doubt what
ever that the Supreme Court would sustain the
proceedings of the courts below, and that the
prisoners would serve their sentences in the
Denit0ptiary