United States v. Patty
| Decision Date | 01 January 1880 |
| Parties | THE UNITED STATES v. PATTY and others. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Wisconsin |
G. W Hazelton, for United States.
L. S Dixon, for defendants.
DYER D.J., (orally.)
This is an indictment under section 3894, Revised Statutes, which provides that as the statute prescribes.
The indictment contains three counts. The first count sets out at length the organization of a lottery scheme, by which the defendants undertook to dispose of a hotel at Fond du Lac known as the Patty House, and charges that on the first day of November, 1879, and on each and every secular day in said month of November, and on each and every secular day between the thirtieth day of said month of November and the tenth day of February, in the year 1880, the defendants did knowingly wrongfully and unlawfully deposit in the post-office of the United States, at the city of Fond du Lac, and did send to the said post-office, to be conveyed by mail, within the meaning of section 3894 of the Revised Statutes, a large number, to-wit, 500, printed circulars concerning said lottery, on each of said days, duly addressed and postpaid, directed to divers persons within and beyond the limits of this district; which circulars each and all were sent and conveyed by and through the mail.
The second count charges that on the twentieth day of January, 1880, the defendants deposited in the post-office at Fond du Lac 100 printed circulars concerning said lottery, addressed to persons unknown to the grand jurors, and that they were deposited to be sent and were sent by mail. The third count is similar to the second, except that it charges the deposit in the post-office at Fond du Lac, on the first day of December, 1879, for the purpose of conveyance through the mail, of 500 circulars concerning said lottery. A motion is made to quash this indictment for duplicity, it being claimed that the first count charges 45,000 distinct, independent offences; the second count 100; and the third count, 500. Upon the argument stress was laid by counsel for the defendants upon the language of this section, which is that etc. And it was insisted that the deposit in the post-office of a single circular to be carried in the mail constituted an offence. This position was controverted by the attorney for the United States, who urged that, under a proper construction of this statute, an indictment could hardly be maintained that charged the deposit or sending by mail of a single letter or circular relating to a lottery, and that in that view it was deemed necessary to set out in the indictment the scheme in which the defendants were engaged, and by means of which they were seeking to dispose of certain property, and that each count of the indictment ought to be regarded as stating a single act, and therefore a single offence.
It is true that the second and third counts do not specifically...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Furnace v. State
... ... The following authorities ... support our conclusion: Hoiles v. United ... States, 3 MacArth. 370; State v ... Hogan, Charlt. (Ga.) 474; State v ... Larson, 85 Iowa ... Bleasdale, 2 ... Car. and K. 765; Regina v. Giddins, Car ... and M. 634; United States v. Patty, 2 F ... 664; United States v. Scott, 74 F. 213 ... We are ... referred to ... ...
-
Creel v. United States
...are sufficiently charged, none of them can be rejected as surplusage in order to support the charge as of another." See United States v. Patty (D. C.) 2 F. 664. And, even if an amendment to the information were possible before the trial, no amendment was made or prayed Furthermore, there ca......