FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95  
96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   >>   >|  
residing. * * * APPEARANCES. For the United States: HON. RICHARD CROWLEY, U.S. District Attorney. For the Defendants: JOHN VAN VOORHIS, ESQ. * * * Tried at Canandaigua, Wednesday, June 18th, 1873, before Hon. Ward Hunt and a Jury. Case opened in behalf of the U.S. by Mr. Crowley. MR. VAN VOORHIS: I wish to raise some questions upon the indictment in this case. This indictment, I claim, is bad for two reasons, and should be quashed. First--The Act of Congress under which it is framed, is invalid so far as it relates to this offence, because not authorized by the Constitution of the United States. Second--There is no sufficient statement of any offence in the indictment. First. Congress has no power to pass laws for the punishment of Inspectors of Elections, elected or appointed under the laws of the State of New York, for receiving illegal votes, or registering as voters, persons who have no right to be registered. No law of Congress defines the qualifications of voters in the several States. These are found only in the State Constitutions and Statutes. The offenses charged in the indictment are, that the defendants, being State officers, have violated the laws of the State. If it be so, they may be tried and punished in accordance with the State laws. No proposition can be clearer. If the United States can also punish them for the same offense, it follows that they may be twice indicted, tried, convicted and punished for one offense. A plea in a State Court, of a conviction and sentence, in a United States Court would constitute no bar or defense, (_12 Metcalf_, _387_, _Commonwealth v. Peters_,) and the defendants might be punished twice for the same offense. This cannot be, and if the act in question be valid, the State of New York is ousted of jurisdiction. And where does Congress derive the power to pass laws to punish offenders against the laws of a State? This case must be tried under the laws of the United States. Against those laws, no offense is charged to have been committed. Such power, if it exist, must be somewhere expressly granted, or it must be necessary in order to execute some power that is expressly granted. The Act of Congress in question, became a law on May 31st, 1870. It is entitled-- "AN ACT TO ENFORCE THE RIGHT OF CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES TO VOTE IN THE SEVERAL STATES,
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95  
96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

States

 

United

 

Congress

 

offense

 
indictment
 
punished
 

offence

 

question

 

expressly

 

granted


STATES

 

punish

 

charged

 

defendants

 

voters

 

VOORHIS

 

Commonwealth

 
Metcalf
 

defense

 

Peters


ousted
 
jurisdiction
 

constitute

 

District

 

sentence

 

Defendants

 

SEVERAL

 
indicted
 

convicted

 

conviction


Attorney

 
execute
 

UNITED

 
entitled
 

APPEARANCES

 

ENFORCE

 
clearer
 
Against
 

residing

 

offenders


CITIZENS

 

derive

 

CROWLEY

 

RICHARD

 

committed

 

Crowley

 
statement
 

Second

 
sufficient
 

punishment