Gloucester County Democrat. (Woodbury, N.J.) 1878-1932, 1908-03-26
THE NEW BRIBERY LIN.

There is so general inquiry for particulars
of the election bribery act under which the
late Grand Jury found bills of indictment
against Republican party workers in Frank
lin township, that we bave secured the
charge of Judge Starr to the trial jury as
the best exposition thereof and publish
same in full.
CHARGE OF THE COURT.
Gentlemen OF the Jury - Fne innfcb-
meut which we have been trying charges
| Preston Newcomb, Thomas Macarthur and
Joseph Macarthur in connection with Lee
| T. Halleck with the offence which is know n
generally in the law as bribery. In the
consideration Of the testimony in this case,
you gentlemen will exclude the name OF
the defendants, Lee T. Halleck, as the Court
at an initial stage of the proceedings decid-
ed there was nothing in the case to justify
any accusation against him, and your yer-
dict therefore with reference TO Mr.. Halleck
will be that of not guilty. This offence is
| based upon an act OF the Legislature which
was passed in the year 1906, which seen 8
to have engrafted upon the criminal juris-
prudence of this State a crime which was
not heretofore known. 1t is called gener-
ally bribery, but she facts and circumstances
under which the crime may be shown are
specifically stated in the act. | will read
the act for your information SO that you
may know precisely what the offence Isl
ssAny person who shall do any act herein
after prohibited shall be deemed guilty Of
the crime Of bribery, and shall be punished
therefor as hereinafter provided = The
gist OF the offence is contained in the second
section: No person shall give or agree to
give for the purpose of promoting or pro-
curing the election of a candidate for public
Office, or for the purpose of promoting or
procuring the nomination Of any person as
candidate for public Office, any money or
any valuable thing to be used for any of
| the purposes hereinafter enumerated -
Then follows three b-diyisions which par
ticulatly indicate the purposes which are
prohibited by the act. The first sub-divis-
ion, the one under which this indictments
is framed, provides that any money or
other valuable thing given or agreed TO be
given to provide or give or to pay, wholly
or in part, the expense of giving or pro-
yidiDg any meat, drink, entertainments or
provisions TO or for any person for the pur-
pose of influencing that person or any other
person to give or refrain from giving his
vote at any election, or on account Of any
such person having voted or refrained from
yoting.n That is the law under which this
| indictments is framed, and as I stated before
it has been in existence but about two
years. and created an offence which did not
exist prior to that time.
Now, desire to state to you, gentlemen,
that the burden is on the State to establish
beyond a reasonable doubt tie defendants
guilt, and reasonable doubt is such a
doubt as | will defne in subsequent
portion of my charge. To justify con-
yicsion under the Indictment based upon
the act OF the Legislature just read, the
State must produce evidence TO satisfy your
minds beyond 9 reasonable doubt that these
defendants Thomas and Joseph Macarthur
and Preston Newcomb, or some one OF
more Of them, knowingly, improperly and
corruptly did give or agree to give for the
purpose of promoting or procuring the cleo
ton of Thomas Macarthur as candidate
| for the Office of Township Committee IN
franklin Township in this county at the
general election of 1907, money or any
valuable thing TO be used 80 provide or give
or to pay, wholly or in part, the expense of
giving or providing drink, entertainments
or PROVISION TO or for any voter OF that
township for the purpose Of influencing such
voter to give his vote at such election for
Macarthur, or on account of such voter hav-
! ing voted at such election for Macarthur.
The essential elements of proof necessary
| for the State to produce In order to support
| the offence charged in the indictments are:
| (1) That Thomas Macarthur was a candi-
date for the Office nan5u a5 che annual eiec-
tion Of 1907. | might state by way Of COM
| ment that there seems TO be no question or
dispute upon this point. ~ That the de-
PENDANTS or one or more of them knowingly
gave or agreed to give for the purpose Of
promoting or procuring McArthur's cleo
tion, money or any valuable thing with the
intent that the same be used TO provide or
give or pay the expense OF providing drink,
entertainment or provision TO any legal
| voter of the township for the purpose of in
fuencing the action or conducts Of such per-
son as yo5er as such election. 90 That
the drink or enter tainment thus provided
must have been for the purpose of corruptly
influencing one or more voters 10 give his or
their vote for Macarthur, or on account of
any voter having voted for Macarthur.
Under this feature of the case is is not es-
sential TO show purpose or intent to cor
rupt, that tDe drink or entertainments be
given TO The voter prior to his casting a
vote; such purpose or intent may be
shown by the furnishing OF such drink or
entertainment after the voting, provided it
be furnished on account OF the voter having
voted for Macarthur, if the purpose of fur
nishing the same was in furtherance of a
design to influence or improperly coIrupt
the voter. La other words, there must be
shown an intent or purpose on the part OF
the defendants or some OF them, that the
drink or entertainments thus prov .ded was
to be used, eitherlby item or other by their
consent or procurement, TO exert corrupt
ing influence on some one or more of the
voters of that townshlp, either before or
after any such voter had exercised the
right TO vote. or that the action of any
voter in casting his vote was to be or was
:. Il IL L..