The Jasper weekly courier. [volume] (Jasper, Ind.) 1858-1922, 1891-12-25

esyeo OuuSoy v0W tne po0Iefnfiary.
lie entered into 40 elaborate discus
} sion In The attempt TO chow that HE irsi
I charge didn't -mean what Il meant
J Iaad concluded - follows:
II 1t results. OF course, that the mere
} sending By one 10 another Of letter OF
document containing advice to bsibe I
voter, or setting forth scheme for such
/ bribery. however bold and repre- epsibIe
10 not indictable. There must be show d
IN addition IN attempt BY she receiver OF
the letter, or Of some other instieated
by him 10 execute the scheme, by brib-
Ing or attempting 20 bribo come voter ID
respect 70 the election OF congressman
or In such way - 20 eject such election !.
\ Another poin. deserves liberation n
IN this connection II the view be
adopted that advice not acted upon nav
constitute crime. then the exacf word ;
used 10 giving the advice, whether oral
tor written, must Be sscertained. and
evsry possibie inteudment In favor OF
Innocence must be allowed, and eli
doubts resolved 10 favor OF the accused.
IL the nee OF money b advised. but the
particular manner or purpose OF its use
Be not clearly. and. indeed, conclusiveIv
indicated. possible innocent use will Be
presumed; and even IL the purpose 10
ori0e be nnQuestionsble. and yet Il sp-
pears that the design was 10 purchase
votes Tor otber officers than represents-
tiyes In congress, IL would be no crime
under the siatute which IL designed to
protect the election for that Office alone.
But under the rule that looks beyond
the advice for the consumms OF the |
crime IN the deeds done IN the execution |
Of u. the adviser may b held responsible. |
within Limitations which neod not nov
Be stated, for the acts OF aeenfs sndI
agencies which be pat 10 motion. sbough /
they 50 beyond. and aside from the let /
ter Of bic advics Or council. IL for in
stance, he puts on foot : scheme 70 in6u-
ence voters BY bribery or other % vfuI 4
means 10 vote for candidates for presi-
oent or governor, saying nothing about
congress- and he agents buy voters forI
a entire ticket. including the candidate
'or congress. the case comes within theII
purview Of this enactment
This statute. - Il stands. IL the re.en- Il
nctment Of . famiiisr and veil under X
stood provision Of the common lsv. and ID
- such, | think Il ought 70 ssand and toII
be Interpreted. but at The oame time feIl
might Be added to. And { fully aeoenell
70 the declaration Of one hiRh a theI1
federal tudiciary whose concurrence n II
~ conclusion is the more weighty b. ID
,aoee given reluctantly. that atherell
2ught to b . statute making Il a Of
'enss against the United States for onsIf
poreon 20 advise another to do any scf|r
p % attempt % do any oct that would | (
prevent The froo exercise Of the elective u
reocn1oo at IN election for Z federal
'mcer; whether such advice 10 acted on It
. not There should. also, b statusej q
making u an offence for any person toIa
'dvise an omcer q such a election toIv
unit or attempt TO o7it the discharReIh b
% any duty, the omission Of which III '
Dade . crime, whether such advice isIf
oIIoWod o. not Bet (as be sddsl Il 4 II
los the province Of the courts 10 create Iii
'de0ees b. aisconstruction. They ca
'uIy declare what the statute meane. Ia
IL there uore serious doubt on thislil
|Osstion. that would REQUIRE ihe ssme 8
esult- There Z In the judgment Of The =
ourt no room for such doubt 10
SAVING THE SMALL 0xEs. III
Judge Woods did not stop with tbe|.
rejection Of the chief ceuspirstor. Tbej
ane federal grand jury had indicted 2
Yer 10 persons for illegal voting inI
iolsti0n Of sec ssh Of the revised z
tsfutes Of the United Statea All thel q
Ddictments read q foIlows:
at ssn election for I repre-I
entstivs in the congress Of the UuitedI
tates fgiving the congrsssiossI diet triciIIo,
I the lawful polling place in tbe-Iks
recinct ofthe coupty OF n saId dis- -
rlcss Of said did then Isl
nd there upIawfuIIy. nowingly and "
vote q said election st saidjtiI
recinct; be, the said notII
ben and there having the lawful right|ni
ben and there TO vote st said election. .rIps
The same form had been previousIv Ini
sed ~ Nels0D TrussIer. CbariesL HoI-I 10
Elm, John T. Lamb. David Turpie. 3. Iit<
Sellers, solomon Clay pool, former dis- Iar
'ict attorpeys, and sustained by The Itb
,urts- But in the case OF these iIIegsIlo
oters Judge Woods qusshcd I'll the in- %
|ctments because they did not Get forthI ~
~ the persOno voted for . repreoents- ~
ve IN congress as we'll = q an election pe
. representation In congress. Yet nIau
. Orange county cases la9 Fed. Rem. I'D
n Judge Woods held that In
1T wss unnecessary that The Indictment 40
= Illegal voting should have charged
90 the ballot cast contained the nsmeI
any psrson voted for for repressntativsI
congress-" III,
And again. on Nov. 5. 1883, q the Coy lei
: q. cases Be held thst lint
1T h only necessary that the forbidden |asl
{ or conduct should have been IN re-Iby
'ect 70 s0 election q which . ropre- he
ntetive Or delegate IL congrsss Waslsse
tied for.r 'tss
In the Gov csse Of 1856, when The 70. Idr'
ctments we're found detective, Judge lInl
'oods was 10 hot haste to bring back 90
. ms0bers Of the grand jury from aIlI
'rts Of the state 10 correct the indict.| \
eDt, and Il . fsct that Jodge Woodslc ~.
ststed one Of the attorneys for The gov. lfos
nment 70 draw up the indict0ept|o ~
sisst Coy st a., and that parts or The ~
rdict writ appeared IL bic own hand. "a
-. - - -