United States v. Ingraham

Decision Date04 February 1892
Citation49 F. 155
PartiesUNITED STATES v. INGRAHAM.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of Rhode Island

Rathbone Gardner, Dist. Atty., for the United States.

Franklin P. Owen, for defendant.

CARPENTER District Judge.

This is a motion in arrest of judgment after verdict on an indictment under section 5438 of the Revised Statutes, which is as follows:

'Section 5438. Every person who makes or causes to be made, or presents or causes to be presented, for payment or approval, to or by any person or officer in the civil military, or naval service of the United States, any claim upon or against the government of the United States, or any department or officer thereof, knowing such claim to be false, fictitious, or fraudulent, or who, for the purpose of obtaining or aiding to obtain the payment or approval of such claim, makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, any false bill, receipt, voucher, roll, account, claim certificate, affidavit, or deposition, knowing the same to contain any fraudulent or fictitious statement or entry, * * * shall be imprisoned,' etc.

The language of the indictment, so far as it is pertinent to the questions raised by this motion, is as follows: In the first count--

'That Royal Ingraham * * * did knowingly, willfully, and unlawfully make and present, and cause to be made and presented, for payment and approval, to the third auditor of the treasury department of the United States of America, a certain claim against the government of the United States.'

-- And in the second count--

'That said Royal Ingraham, * * * for the purpose of obtaining and aiding to obtain the payment and approval of a certain claim against the government of the United States, to-wit,' etc., ' * * * did knowingly, willfully, and unlawfully use and cause to be used a certain false affidavit, to-wit, the affidavit of one Perry Ingraham and one Mary E. Ingraham, ** * subscribed and sworn to on the ninth day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and ninety, before Daniel H. Remington, a justice of the peace, he, the said Royal Ingraham, then and there well knowing the said affidavit to contain a fraudulent and fictitious statement, to-wit,' etc.

The motion in arrest of judgment is based upon the following grounds: (1) That the first count is uncertain and charges no offense, in that it does not set forth that the third auditor of the treasury department of the United...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • State v. Swan
    • United States
    • Utah Supreme Court
    • December 5, 1906
    ... ... (People v. Carolan, ... 71 Cal. 195.) It was said in the case of United States v ... Ambrose, 2 F. 764: "It is sufficient to charge a ... presentation to the first ... naming the person who held the office." (United States ... v. Ingraham, 49 F. 155.) ... The ... fact that no skins or scalps were exhibited or that the ... ...
  • Williams v. Territory of Arizona
    • United States
    • Arizona Supreme Court
    • April 2, 1910
    ... ... altered, forged, or counterfeit.'" United States ... v. Staats, 8 How. 41, 12 L.Ed. 979 ... False ... affidavit: "Relates to the ... qualified nor the oath administered, nor the paper ... forged." United States v. Ingraham (C.C.), 49 ... False ... bank note: A forged paper in the similitude of a bank note or ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT