The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-12-28
Men Arrested mt Crawfordsville on
Charge of VOtc-Selling Must stand
Trial Under It's Provisions.
EXHAUSTIVE OPINION GIVEN
CLEARCUT ANALYSIS of THE LAW
AND THE CONSTITUTION.
The Infamy of VOte-Selling-An In
famous Crime Defned-The
Ruling I'm Detail.

Special to the Indianapolis Journal.
CRAWFORDSVILLE,I Ind, Dec. N.-The
test case of the State VS.. James Osborne.
charged under the Caraway Jaw with sell
ing his vote at the last election, and which
was argued before Judge West on Monday
on the constitutionality of this law. has
resulted in the prisoner being held to an
swer for his act. Judge West handed
down ain opinion this morning, holding the
law constitutional. although he says there
are some peculiar things in connection with
the law. 1t was contended by Irwin Dwig-
gins attorney for the defendant. that an
Infamous crime must be punished by i'm
prisonment or fine. and that the selling of a
vote was not an Infamous crime as de-
fined in the State Constitution, which says
a man can only be deprived Of his suf-
frage on account of having committed ar
infamous crime. The defense also contend
ed that the Caraway law was against pub
lie policy in that 1t permitted any design
ing person to scheme and get the float
ers'' to sell their votes and then to come
into court and convict them of the sale.
thus disfranchising them, and at the same
time to get a reward of 800 for each man
found guilty. this TO be paid by the coun-
ty, which would about ruin a county finan-
cially i'm case anything like the actual
number of these 'foaters' could be
trapped The defense also claimed that the
"floaters" themselves could so into a COM
bination and sell their votes to one of their
own number and then turn around and be
arrested, be found guilty. and. only being
disfranchised, could divide the reward be-
tween them, thus actually getting more
money this way than they could possibly
get from the political parties in twenty
years. The cases against the men will be
heard on JAN 2s and If convicted the mat
ter will be taken to the Supreme Court.
Judge West, in making his decision,
brought out the following points, and he
seemed to consider the matter a very in
teresting point of law. He said:
1.-The Constitution of Indiana gives the right
Of suffrage to every male inhabitant twenty-one
the United States the question Of citizenship
who has resided in the State Fix months, In the
township sixty days, and in the precinct thirty
days previous the election. The only power
the Legislature has to take away the right OF
suffrage from any individual is that provided
~ ,;on Which " provides The General kssemb11
shall have the power 10 define the right OF sun-
rage and 10 render ineligible any person con-
vtcted of an infamous crime Never before 10
my knowledge. has there been any attempt TO
separate disfTanchisement and make IL the sole
punishment for the commission OF a crime In
am other statutes Acknowledgement has been
considered incident rather than a part OF
the punishment
LEGISLATIVE POWER.
'The Legislature has the power to fix the pun
ishment OF a crime losg IT is not excess
sive inhumau unusual. That the punishment
In this case is not excessive or innuman Is con-
clusvely demonstrated from the fact that N the
allegations Of the information are true the de-
fendant has considered his vote OF TO more value
than that IL should be placed on the markets OF
the world to the highest bidder. as he would
sell personal property: that IL Is not unusual we
have but TO look az the many. many statutes In
our own state which provide cisfranchisement
in addition to imprisonment Therefore. l take