Year: 1868




John DevIin.


Before Judge Benedict.


AT the opening OF this court yesterday noon the
Assistant District Attorney, Mr.. Allen moved SEN
tence In the case OF John Devlin. Mr.. Allen pro-
ceeded to indicate the statute under which
the indictment against the prisoner had been
found. He said that the first count was based upon
section 73 act Of June 80, 1854, amended by the
act OF July, 1866, which provides that any person
who carried on any business or profession for which
the law imposed special tax without paying the
special tax was subject to imprisonment for o term
OF two years and fine OF $500 or both. The second
count was based upon section %, act OF June so,
1854 and also section 49, which provided penalty OF
two years. Imprisonment and $500 fine for any who
should carry on q business for which license was
provided without procuring such license. The third
count was based upon section seventy-nine, act OF
enter in book, Kept for that purpose, the number
OF gallons Of spirits manufactured. In case OF u
failure to do this the offender was liable to impris
onment for one year and a fine OF $500.


Devlin was then arraigned for sentence, and in
reply to question Of the the court as to whether he
passed upon him he said he had not.


THE SENTENCE.


In passing the sentence the Judge Haid:-The
offences charged against you are not trivial In their
character. Tie words OF the statute creating them
indicate our intention on the part oflaw makers that
punishabe-the first one by two years, imprison-
ment aud a fine OF $500 or both; the second
by an imprisonment OF Two years and q fine OF
$500; the third, Imprisonment for six months,
and fine OF $500, making In all five years,
Imprisonment and & 800 fine. The government
has fixed that penalty as proper punishment for
those offences. The punishment shows that they are
not trivial. You have been found guilty OF commit
ting all these offences and the conviction, in the
Judgment OF the court, is correct. have listened TO
the statement Of counsel I'm your behalf and have ex
amined the afidavits presented. Looking, then, ut
guilty s eIp md them grave % in character % 1u1s as
Indicated In the statute, and attended with
few mitigating circumstances You are
intelligent man acquainted with the law ana with
the rules OF the business. You had at time been
an assistant assessor, as understand and 1t impos
sibe TO suppose had you desired to comply with the
law that you could not have done Your failure TO
comply with the law Is not due to any neglect of any
oflcai. The punishment for other offences than this
forms no part Of the intent OF the court
on the present occasion. II v did the
extreme penalty OF the statute would be
been indicated by this trial have come In Incident
ally; but they are not proven and form no part OF
the punishment 10 be inflicted upon you. When
these offences proven they will receive the proper
Committed these offences deliberately, and by your
the United States. You could have paid
the tax; you could have received the
could have kept the books which the law makes
necessity for all dealers. notice In the ailldavit
that the books were kept the time to have shown
that was on the trial. can conceive no reason why
production would nave tended to show your
innocence. However that may be, II is true
that you have shown disregard for the
law. The letter written by your own hand
you thought the law could not be enforced. intend
20 inict "A punishment winch IN MY judgment viii
be proper punishment FOR these offences. IL will
be warning TO others IN the community that tie