United States v. Caplis

• Decision Date: 24 May 1919
• Docket Number: 2526.
• Citation: 257 F. 840
• Parties: UNITED STATES v. CAPLIS et al.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Louisiana

257 F. 840

UNITED STATES v. CAPLIS et al.

No. 2526.

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Shreveport Division.

May 24, 1919

Joseph Moore, U.S. Atty., and H. H. Jackson, Asst. U.S. Atty., both of Shreveport, La.

Foster Looney & Wilkinson, of Shreveport, La., for defendants.

JACK District Judge.

The defendants, charged with conspiracy to violate the Selective Service Draft Act (Act May 18, 1917, c. 15, 40 Stat. 76 (Comp. St. 1918, Secs. 2044a-2044k)), have filed a plea in abatement, based on the allegation that the jury commissioner who assisted in the drawing of the grand jury which returned the indictment is not a well-known member of the principal political party in the district opposed to that to which the clerk belongs, as required by section 276 of the Judicial Code (Act March 3, 1911, c. 231, 36 Stat. 1164), as amended by Act Feb. 3, 1917, c. 27, 39 Stat. 873 (Comp. St. 1918 Sec. 1253). The clerk, it is alleged, is a Democrat; whereas the commissioner is registered as an Independent consequently, the defendants allege the grand jury was illegally drawn, and the indictment should be abated and set aside.

Section 276 of the Judicial Code as amended is as follows, the provision relating to a deputy clerk having been incorporated in the section by the amendment of February 3, 1917:

'All such jurors, grand and petit, including those summoned during the session of the court, shall be publicly drawn from a box containing, at the time of each drawing, the names of not less than three hundred persons, possessing the qualifications prescribed in the section last preceding, which names shall have been placed therein by the clerk of such court, or a duly qualified deputy clerk, and a commissioner, to be appointed by the judge thereof, or by the judge senior in commission in districts having more than one judge, which commissioner shall be a citizen of good standing, residing in the district in which such court is held, and a well-known member of the principal political party in the district in which the court is held opposing that to which the clerk, or a duly qualified deputy clerk then acting, may belong, the clerk, or a duly qualified deputy clerk, and said commissioner each to place one name in said box alternately, without reference to party affiliations, until the whole number required shall be placed therein.'

The evidence shows that the clerk of court is a Democrat. The commissioner came originally from Illinois, and has lived in the state of Louisiana about 27 years, during which time he has always been regarded and considered a Republican. He testifies that he has considered himself a Republican ever since he was old enough to vote, and that he has never affiliated with the Democratic party, nor voted in its primaries, though on one or two occasions in a local election, he has voted for the Democratic candidate; that he has served on the Republican state executive committee, and at one time was a candidate of that party for state treasurer. In Louisiana he has always voted the national Republican ticket, though he has sometimes in local elections 'scratched' a party candidate he thought undesirable, and voted for another on the opposite ticket whom he thought better qualified. Under a recent state statute, requiring that a voter fill in on his registration blank the party, if any, with which he affiliates, he registered as an Independent.

While the defendants allege that they were greatly prejudiced as a result of such appointment of the jury commissioner, it has not been suggested, nor is it apparent, in what way they were or could have been prejudiced. They do not claim to have themselves been members of a political party opposed to that of the clerk. There was no partisan alignment in the enactment of the Draft Law, and all patriotic citizens, regardless of party, have stood firmly for its enforcement.

The same plea was made in the case of United States v Chaires et al. (1889, in the Circuit Court for the Northern District of Florida, before Judges Pardee and Swayne) 40 F. 820, in which Judge Pardee, as the...