| Show A MASTERLY DEFENCE se segregation tion in snow W cases treated upon hormon 11 ormon morality ably set dortht l now noble rica pica the ing is the like closing part of othis abu able arz argument silent i t I 1 lion into F s dS ninde bebow uio tile supreme knuit ot of tile united states on the snow scoot eased I 1 it your honors Di etise I 1 conio come now tu to tile alic question of u Fegre segregation gation lri is i rabin u by 0 former interposed in two wo ot of these abit a eit veto ivcic found ag adust M air I 1 brov ou on lie dip day arid and by tile the grandi gravid jury it ry fur for ne illi the llie sallie oleu in ism issaic ir 1881 rind tile k fl levell ven first Illo ollIS of 0 issa thu the que stivis Is li imply ibid vital lie 1110 alleged cohabitation has been continuous nod mud lit t lite fanic place gild nd knitli tie tile lie WOl women trill can it il be by nu an urbit arbitrary dIvI bIou of ottic the those into su the statute only bresci pi ibea otte one emil tv ty bw li ful and as tile llie offense offence in its iiii very li is of ij H n continuous bic olt or i ci lets of acts ull till to i file one thin thins termed ta maln ln it Is ily ilia ihu sallie mine offense until tile llie continuity is broken by a or by tome some its liked act or cessation and where the nut net covers esery day fura of nearly three jeal as chourn by the clicc c tile of felice is out and it is lucic incle ly I 1 arbitrary to tit dillile AL continuous act by 3 eds illa it Is juit ut u t as iiii to di division ision by weeks or men days liy ud and such ate bitingly dayi adoll lon that hint there c is if no division in ill fact act or lit in I 1 owl iw aul it CAI bo tar far ma hit tile books tills ll is tile ali first hirai time that nil ili not tempt lii ill vcr eer been made to tile if frn 0 of 0 waw cation liliu ii a fact Is i itself cry sig isbill cant and will doubtless lease lii its avei with the court in ili this ibis eay ry important question 1 31 siy y import nut an bv beair air as a I 1 will how our Ilo ilos lu in the llie conrad at 0 iny it it II resolve inela into ilici ample art it is tor ami alf i lf jury by br this novel iain pio cedille to 1 io 10 i o 0 likic lii ic the hillend by law li chat it onty loc become coule life imprisonment for an air off offense enbe to 10 biall tile llie afat u bite te has lia mitat hed its as he pena aly 1 v gi iliin awl lillee hundred dollars dol liiri fine iut hut hile v a III annj lid nu no case directly it iii 1 point an llie lite pinnell le we invoke hia been al applied 11 lie d I 1 in n c isra ages which nie iv anali ou tu to tills alad the ibe of abe abc co cunitz in ii thoc ibn c cases li is so co ent e ree lid I 1 coon tor for olt doubt as ai to I 1 tie lie of it our poi rlou lei in lite case anu of sturgis VA v d 45 4 N X y tile court licud llma unar onu one penalty could be recovered for or several violations of 0 a statute irrin aln battle before a abe suit was bron brony glit lit mul ili id bp ni tile and pull of 0 tic icv tuc the coul t ii es file lie f follo Hins pertinent ian 1 nui aage sc it if tile hit lit is ii tui fur 1 a I augle ellse it opu operates rates as it 1 l w warning aning I 1 to discontinue tile pra pratlie tice ce or acts coul pi 4 aued ol of 1 1 lie dolay may assay be it al nu in theli be ligett gilt qt tile It party pilly lo 10 a be act 0 under ahli rule tile pai pudy ty lieve a an I 1 eunity to desist to cell doing the ibo act til of mid and if lie he do a nut he be wll vill knowingly incur nil tilt hazard of 11 in the rase case of 0 aisher vs X Y U C tried 11 II it II R R nUo go Gy X Y llie ilia same doctrine tic us held ind and the court saas suf ati acl dill one can be it covered upon lie under tinder consideration for till nil 1104 prior to tile commencement of lie it 1 after this ills it Is again violated violit cd another may may be re covel ed in ili another action commenced thereafter kind and to BO ou on as 8 longas long AS violations core finite this will not only tend at once to put it alop to tile extol lion no bet it is committed kno angly by the defendant but where it Is 13 done under i mistake as its I 1 ignots gie it notice that its cl i alit to 0 charge taa the amount claimed la Is ight c ch qa and nill inducts 1 I 7 cautious cauti oun altion ail t tile luc silou tiou nud tin nil of 0 tile the daim baim before a I 1 liila ilia ous otis amount ol 01 pell odiles have been lit lii milired Cil ired it if it be ba that elie sc u by com tact icing cult la in eiselt basl phere i lichu the ile i 14 only 30 50 how tat ini pera geratic tic leftist bellie battle rule in ili a case like this A where here tile the penalty penally loil posed may fully be bulb tine and and where the lite delay might cause the llie defendant to loot bot on oiin acir 1 I 1 ruinous amount of 0 Ilen penal AllIeS in 10 hilt blit ami to 10 subject himself to filpi for cifa the chief justice Juit your position la a that they cannot divide up till a continued cohade tation into plot is mr air P richard yes yea sit sir rha lt chief jubline Ju bLice here alere thay seem tu too have malle maile only one arlest anest mr Iti chaid float Is tine ti etc they waited until more than three years after pasted a prosecution nod and then arrested the abe Z dc F edl nud indicted him bini three 1 on one examination 0 before the gland jury ury for lation naion irli back two iwo yeats arid and clever tes this lit I 1 foht wo we complain ot of and aarl vc ye say there wa wan but one offense olf ense and have been lint but one unit and ono one prosecution the clief justice 11 ibey bey charged him with 4 ith wills mhd rattle it women woman in oro every case mr 51 r at tea rind imd ed ad the evidence to blin lu in each case eslo using it three bianes and pru pro curau aurius three convictions II 11 r miller 1111 ler I 1 unde understand that the llie indictment tor for ilia offense committed lei in issa was waa I 1 birst rot tried arid and the abe defend aut convicted I 1 mr yes tir ar juanice and you pleaded th tb it in bur bar of 0 the ra liera mr It Ilic birds Ichards yes yen sir bir and when two ol of tile llie cases cant lead been tried we pleaded thein both lit bur bar of 0 lite third the chief your alignment Is to the effect that hat oca iii are liable to ot gregatos gre gato the whose while A aill curin cura tall lall it clr richards ido I 1 do not lot so understand it air ir ay my iy iw is ii till tim the legislature power dee arc N iiii shall constitute itic effect a penally lor for it timer the lb govern elect has anat the offense has been it may acute wi lettler tile the tons hai a ter ir a apar but until it II dic projectile there can an be but one kiter a nn n t Is uund found alii ali I abe I 1 be par riv liaa has lead notley na as the anuw york luimit saye labe K he repeat aliu lit offer kee he mity may be prosecuted sk aud and so no on n my contention Is that tile the talut lion abeln being contin tIMI cannot bo be dl divided aided lip arid and iu lid a to ce institute beveral olen often cles the file chief justice does docs it on he record that fill this was a continued co hatel tation mr It lU chardi ichards it does the i indict macuh acut ore are nu all cont ninea lu in llie ilia pleat pleas ot fornier former conviction nod and to together geaber charge a continuo ux covering co verin every day beti veen january lt lat ISM and december coo luber lat ferring Itu again your tio honors nors to the autho titles in lul mayor it if new v Or Ordre drewan ioan 12 jolma the doctrine wu we ate aie liero contend ins to or 16 1 emphatically declared and a decolon dc de clion cllon by lord boins field leg 1 quoted to in loup kuppart port ot of it the bute supreme reme court of 0 north Caro carolin IuA in the case of state V 2 ibis in the he ollow lei ln terms 11 were euch a i u arlue tolerated it Is impossible to say buy hele 1 lis would end 0 11 chii bis rollou of dimes clinics like matter cly ly dei able Is ii ichii nanc to the bi it and ami policy police of lit tile lav fly anil and ought not DOE to ho countenanced tle of tile lio collias in u these I 1 anil 1 nit other oilier CUSPS cases died cited lie in our brief would beenu to place the be mailer beyond all con to liver y wei a it not abat lei in ore one c k e v Conti connors ors ill mass masby the lie buil leme coult coin to of ilis acau aclu stats held otheral e unit und upun upon this case alio llio for re relies liest two acio etc found HI giul ul the llie do tend int ini am lie iho sallie day adny for keeping it a for ile be il lal sale of 0 lend tile court ilela that dinall might iiii ht stand lit in the theory as ts stated in common earli vs ito Kobl binon bin nion on Q ilg ag mi s that ilia grand jury Is nested i iery cry laige in the ellich binl arts inay 11 ie 0 alleged as a 11 tingle ol of fet I 1 te it is difficult to lev by eliji pro icess ot of rea reasoning sonin g the alic coul cobit t tills coni or too to mcc rv corille intile it with the k elc in cot ary iti 1 lesof ot law blut lesla Is I 1 laha a power can anly be ly by competent ant hoilly la IS well ael fulfill fulfil ful fled fil aud that no ito judicial or executive or body van VAD 1 such functions will nut not lie ha dC denied ind and yei ai while hile the law should always ila bo fixed arid and definite lei in its iti eni eurs ail neier or unco win it hiis is contended that it 1 araud jury buhay at lid its pleasure by too ur or more ments ili ilia a eel till i case attic penally by bylaw law aud and so L the ibe le Isla tile will cx pieced in unmistakable ter tyrnn nil to adopt such a 1 rule alc Is if to the power to a u grand jury to milo make or modify tin tile law it in its most and vital pao allt t it il na na plin principle ciple loi fee ns as the coult of 0 IOA gave in fu like cage at n state vs ill 11 lowi lowa lie he thor def either committed one die crime or lie committed four it I 1 is nut for or elie state at its election by bethi abl form onn of lu its indictment to elro ire to det enill inta net act the ilia AIna finality lity ol of one OIK crime or of 0 four nt at pleasure lea siire the act pat takes wholly of tile the one or holly of the ln other oilier now I 1 ewt t submit tint thit tilt clear ot of A inot import tnt nt legal principle inest be co coilet iret ind that she question que i estin involved ii i solely a A question tit i low liw IN wilh ill which the grand in I 1 I 1 f rin can baar li nr v whatever to it du when we rome bonit to consider the point US tea it tris tit aben ale ill these vows c rue CA lt at how tir adji 1111 najil jilt the elie theory of n ilia he P iose cution is field lilt was aei without tiny or on tile hie 1 I 1 t ot of the gova gota ell to heel lcou up an n illard ill 1 frd cot un otis cohabitation lor bov focally thice th icci yeats und and lie lie wits indicted ate ail comici ed of 0 three linen offe offenses nees and sentenced tois t I 1 impi loon ment and to pay a 1 fine of when the law under to aich lie tented fixed tile die maximum ile penalty I 1 lur for steel lie ain offense at AV lv mont lis 1 imprisonment end line inc As I 1 hac wc sav is the llie division of 0 line by yean is and it 1 the abe anand dmd jury could ic ally filed three indictments tl alicy I 1 cy could ali jeisi ar us as viell find filed thirty or tillee hurdled hiie adoption of 0 this theory enables the prosecution prose probe cutlo cution to sit ME supinely b by feea period 0 of three years without any all effal t to enrol cc the law arid and then v with lite otte one f til 11 come down up ju nu all ln in diulus diu lul with enough for or offenses alicade e 0 En witted to won liable li tak to tor for the ibe re tua luder of liis ida life ic and to in noes ate an linni cuse fortune because baciu e if 1 a elmo call be indicted for ur each year he way be prosecuted lur for eael morI nio illi tIll or cacti week or even fur for eich cach day in tho ilia chrise years of limitation it if indicted for each month the would agic gate IS years and the to 1000 while no au indictment lor for each neck would entail lati an ot if as 3 vars tied and lines amounting to 6 10 SO when the calculation Is ii extended into dyr dayt the is simply ap appalling pilling chit blowing g an of 5 17 ems vi I 1 aud nil tines to and this is by no no me antan idle antion upon this ibis point tor for ohp ery judge bibo nied filed cne cail there was no lt legal principle which pie cut tills I 1 tile trout being carried cir rid to the full nil extent which aich I 1 hive have suggested assistant Alto incy lita flaury tiry do the records disclose any au v late laii 11 Is 1 that ile lr idich Kic bardi xu no sir not it ii these caseb but it t li ii 1 a I public bi to leat fact act to which I 1 ahrn entitled to I 1 lefco FI that it la 16 utterly to believe that douglass Cou glass ever intended to authorize or the llie perpetration ot of such air ail toli uman outrage in the lie arealue of justice la in alo ali c second and third clues tried the court chat ged I 1 alie ike in jury ry as ni I 1 lows it if you filed beyond a 0 doubt that the defendant lead this th tear car issa in oue note rase case iba a le legel al I 1 alft ift living living to in biggham city box ela elder der co utah atory from dhow le WM wag tin divolL div oiLed ed that lie ho recognized her as his ii ile bold beld tier her out ab buch and ted to her t IS as such wite wife gild and that hint dill duijn in the salue line year lc he lived lu in the bame ionic will tile ho jule tier as tile ills wife ife 1 itu tier hor as huch and supported aud and field her bar out is ii a 1 I wife then than the offense of 0 unlawful a fill cohabitation li is complete arid and you oil will hod field the guilty the legal wife to la this cue case li IS the AN U whom the lie defendant first m ltd in ID tho the mis cities farist tri irk 0 it in evl ev ehll ll 2 tuat that deai el el 1 no arid ami Cha Ll loto ito IS dow deau U re c married to tile sit defendant at the same time anil and th at they bey ere era his hi first wives and that bat sarali sarah win was next married to film upon tills ut nets it coin c of uniti its tit in its by chief justice bauc deu declared lared thul that sarah was tho the law fill alfr ife lu la the iho second and third cases it 11 only appeared that adellie wits vs the first one married mid arid the kilie wout waa treated as abill lawful ulie in these creeks and ito DO refer I 1 ed 0 a lit in the foregoing tore oi instruction it wais 1111 that the defendant lived with finnk the lh alit uit uno one iccie wits no eviden evidence cu that lie bo hold bad even seen adding in IW 1 or I lie in ISSI ond and nu no pre proof bof was offer offered ed ot of I 1 or 01 liny huy kind ot of bet between weert tied ind ili III ln ili tiou required not nothing baug of the kind it will be te that ihil tin the que lion to be determined by albe jury was not nol As u might icib be b run the ibe sign aien ol 01 bo s mr snows legal lf if lint but lien real question was waa aid to ir roii aili inure lines iri jusits ot of his bis wives the file cobit by this instruction mok eliol the ibe question entirely fj one ion I 1 lie j jury it ry a ai s its 1 with one of nl tile the NO conlen and LAJ l ld them a lutter or of law 1 ali it living 11 lu the santa lily with walh it ile lv and recognizing holding li oldin out ont nad aind tier her it ucb causti to of c I 1 tiny ny proof that the accused bad ever the pm iod charged seen his difo or boen been I 1 in if lier aur and that too toil lu in tile the face ace of 0 tile the rifea positive mat ement that lie ie 11 had ad not la III any wily way lived with her burlog eald period mr hr justice Il lla ilan atlan ile he admit that too lio claimed her nt as tits ills wiler wife ItIc hardit yes ves sir sir mr justice fl flardan arlan aud supported begaii ler ills ila aia wit 0 mr yes Yc mr lr clr litrun bow eliat fact net Is to con cohabitation mr Ulc Itle bardi |
