Third--Because the court erroneously held, that the defendant had not a
lawful right to vote.
Fourth--Because the court erroneously held, that if the defendant, when
she voted, did so in good faith, believing that she had a right to vote,
that fact constituted no defence.
Fifth--Because the court erroneously held that the question, whether the
defendant, at the time of voting knew that she had not a right to vote,
was a question of law to be decided by the court, and not a question of
fact to be decided by the jury.
Sixth--Because the court erred in holding that it was a presumption of
law that the defendant knew that she was not a legal voter, although in
fact she had not that knowledge.
Seventh--Because congress had no constitutional right to pass the act
under which the defendant was indicted, and the act and all proceedings
under it are void.
Sir, so far as my information in regard to legal proceedings extends,
this is the only court in any country where trial by jury exists, in
which the decisions that are made in the haste and sometimes confusion
of such trials, are not subject to review before any other tribunal. I
believe that to the decisions of this court, in criminal cases, no
review is allowed, except in the same court in the informal way in which
I now ask your honor to review the decisions made on this trial.
Pages:
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