Case Name: Respublica against Samuel Ray
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1800-10
Citations: 3 Yeates 65
Docket Number: 
Parties: Respublica against Samuel Ray.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (Yeates)
Volume: 3
Pages: 65–66

Head Matter:
Respublica against Samuel Ray.
A prosecutor under the election law of 15th Feb. 1799, who is entitled to one moiety of the fine, admitted a witness, on executing a release to defendant.
The word influence in the 18th section of this act, means using the party’s en-deavours, and does not imply that he must succeed.
The defendant was indicted on the 18th section of the late general election law, passed 15th February 1799, (4 St. Laws. 343) for that he, being an alien, and not qualified to vote in this state, did appear at an election in the town of Franklin, on the 8th October 1799, for the purpose of issuing tickets, and of influencing the citizens qualified to vote.
Edward Hale was an agent, appointed to attend at the said place of election, under the 3d section of the act, and gave information to a magistrate of the defendant’s improper conduct, during the time of voting. He was indorsed as prosecutor, though reluctant.
Fíale was offered as a witness, but excepted to on the ground of interest, as being entitled to one half of the fine on conviction, under the 24th section, the same not being specific ; whereupon he executed a release to the defendant of his share of the forfeiture, and filed the same in court, and was thereupon admitted and sworn.
*It did not appear that the defendant distributed any tickets on the election ground, but that he endeavoured [*66 to procure five or six persons to give their votes for a certain ticket; whether he succeeded or not is unknown.
Mr. Sample for the defendant,
insisted, that the defendant could not be legally convicted of influencing citizens qualified to vote, unless it could be ascertained that he prevailed on them to' give their votes agreeably to his wishes.

Opinion:
But the court said, that if influencing means succeeding in the party's efforts, the law would be a dead letter; no conviction could take place, because no citizen is compellable to declare how he has given his suffrage. The word pursuade has been construed to carry the persuasion into effect; (2 Ld. Raym. 889) and the same idea has been assigned to it in prosecutions for high treason during the revolutionary war. 1 Dall. 39. But the word influence has not the same extensive signification, and only means, to use the party's endeavours, though he may not have been able to carry his point. This appears clearly from the latter words of the 18th section, where it is said, "every "person interfering in the manner aforesaid, shall forfeit and "pay any sum not exceeding 30 dollars, for every such offence."
The defendant was acquitted of issuing tickets, but convicted of influencing persons to vote, and was fined 15 dollars.