United States Circuit Court.
{"character_count": 2778, "word_count": 500, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9502000212669373], "ccnet_perplexity": [1910.699951171875], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
i


The United States versus Samuel X. Wood, on
an indictment for perjury.-This long protracted
prosecution suddenly brought o clcse' In con
sequence of difference Of opinion between tne
judges. Previous to the District Attorney com,
mencing TO address the jury, Mr. Hugh Maxwei
asked the views Of the bench preliminary point,
which, if determined afrmatively, would prevent
the case going to the jury 1t may De rememDsrea'
that the alleged perjury committed before de-
putty colec Of the custom house, IN swearing 70
the truth of several invoices OF goods imported
from Liverpool, in the ship Sheridan, Ia the course
Of the year 1888. The testimony to support TINS
allegation consis ed Of the custom house records,
the false INVOICES and quantity Of letters, supposed
te have been written by Wood, to his father, IN
England, instructing him In what way TO make our
false invoices in order to enable the accused to fol.
low out his frauds on the revenue here.


The common law Of England requires that all in
dictments for perjury should be supported by the
a conviction. The same rule has always been sup
pesed to prevail in this country, and it was this
point that Messrs. Maxwell and Griffin desired the
decision Of the Court


Judge Thompson said that in his view Of the
matter one viUa Uoce living witness, at the least,
must depose the alsty Of the accuseds oath, and
his testimony must be supported by corroboratlve Q
circumstances in order to make it available Ihis,
said his Honor, 6 conceive to be settled fechnt'
cal rule which might be very inconvenient, and may
be deemed unreasonable in its operation IN particular
cases, but it is not for me to Il gisate on this NATTER
shall stop to enquire what the law ought to be,
as il is sufficient know what it is, and to act under
it. The case, therefore, cannot go to the jury


Judge Belts said that he was Of opinion that 1t was
possible to produce such testimony as might dis
pense with living witness altogether in contradie-
tion Of the alleged false OATH The statute In reia-
tien to treason required viua testimony to sup
port that charge yet for the last 300 years
written by the person alluded, have been received
evidence against him. Now, do not see, SAID ans
Honor, why the same rule should not apply TO the
charge Of perjury.


Judge Thompson said, nor do l, but still It is so,
and the go up to the Supreme Court OF the
u States TO settle the point.


The accused was, Of course, then liberated under
bail, to abid~ the decision OF the Court above


Counsel for the u. s., b. f. Butler. District Attor-
ney, and w. Mawberry. For Weed, Hugh Maxwell,
- Grifen Sen. and daight Engers.


The Court then took up the civil calender; but no
trial Of any interest had gone to the jury up to the
hour Of adjournment.