UNITED STATES V. EAGAN.
(Oircuit Oourt·. ,E. D, HialOuri, B. D. March 28,
I,>la\linga number of fictitious names on the registration list at the same time and place constitutes but one offense.
'Anindicttnent charging that the defendant "entered and registered seven namesae names of persons who had then and there applied to him * * * to be registered, "etc., "when, in truth and in fact, no persons represented by said names 'had applied to him, or taken the oath," etc., is neither uncertain nor repugnant; ,
On Special Demurrer. Indictment under Rev. St. registration. Thomd8 P.' Ba8ha'W and D.' P. Dyer, for the United '0. Marshall, for
.0. S. § 5512, for
THAYER, J. The demurrer in this case is special,and the count. of the indictment, on the ground-First, .that it states more than one offense in the same count; second, that the ofthecount are repugnant;, and, third" that they are so vague apoq inconsistentthl;\t defendarit is not advised of the precise charge he is called upon to meet, and cannot prepare for trial. The count to which exceptions are taken.. in substance charges the defendant (who was a deputy-recorder of voters in the tenth ward of the city of St. Louis) with having placed on the registration book in his cutltody seven names as names of persons who had appeared before him and taken the oath required of voters, and applied for registration, when, in truth and in fact, no such personsappeared Of took oath, or applied to be registered, " In other words,the eharge is that of placing fictitious names on the registration lists. ' It is urged that, because the indictment in one:C011nt charges the entryon the lists Of seven fictitious names, that it therefore states as many separate and independent offenses. This. would be true; no doubt, if the seven names were placed on the. lists oil different occasions; that is, on -different days. But inasmuch as the indictment shows. that the names were so entered at the same time and place I to-wit, on September 1,1886, we are of the opinion that it constitutes butane offense, and is properly eharged as such. The unity of the offense is not broken by the number of alleged fictitious names so pIacedon the Jist&, whether it 'be one . or seven, so long as the act is single; that is, doria at the same, time and place. The other points of the demurrer are even less tenable. The eharge contained in the count is plainly that defendant" entered and reg-istered seven names as names of persons * * * who had then and there applied to him * * * to be registered," etc.· when, "in truth and in fact, no persons represented by said names had applied to him, or had taken the oath," etc.
UNITED STATES V. ZEISLER.
We see nothing repugnant in the count, and we may further add that there is no uncertainty in the charge which need put the defendant to disadvantage in making his defense. The demurrer is accordingl)' ruled.
UNITED STATES 11. ZEISLER.
(Circuit Oourt, N. D. lllirwis. March 14, 1887.)
1. LoTTERIEs-MAILING CIRCULARS-INDICTMENT. The effect of Rev. 8t. U. 8. § 3B94, prohibiting the mailing of lot.tery circulars, etc., is to make any matter concerning lotteries unmailable, and to SUbject the sender of any such matter by mail to the penalty therein provided. 2. SAlIB-FLOATING MUNICIPAL BONDS. When a city or a government, in order to make an inducement for peQple to buy their bonds, holds out large prizes to be drawn by chance, or determined by lot in the manner. in which prizes are usually determined in honestly conducte.d lotteries,. the mailing of CIrculars concernmg. such drawings, past and filture, is a mailing of lottery circulars, within Rev. 8t. U. 8. § BBll4.
Indictment under Rev. St. u. s. § 3894, for sending a lottery circular though the mails. W."G.Ewing, U. S. Dist. Atty., for the United States. Kraua,BrO£ket & Mayer, for defendant.
Bx.ooom,]. Thedefendant is charged by the indictment in this Case with willfully and knowingly'depositing in the post-office of the United States, to be conveyed by mail, a circular (loncerning a lottery; that is to say, a circularaddressed to one August Muller, entitled "Fortune, Allthentisches Central Ziehungsblatt," and concerning divers lotteriestllerein mentioned·. Upon the trial the defendant admitted sending the circulars through 'the mail as charged, and a verdict of guilty was relldered; whereupon defendant entered a motion for new trial, and inarresfof sentence, on the ground that the matter sent through the mail did not concern. or relate to a lottery, within. the meaning of s.ection &894 of the Revised Statutes, under which the indictment was found: Section 8894 reads as follows: .' "No letter or circular concer:r;IiJ;lg lotteries, so-called '. gift concerts,' or other similar enterprises, offerhig prizes, or concerning scbetnes devised and intended to deceive and defraud. the pUblic, for the purpose of obtaining money under false pretenses, shall be carried in the mail.'.4\.ny person who shall knowingly deposit or send anything .1;(), be conveyed by mail, in violation of .shall be puni,shed by .fine of. not mpre than $500, nor less than $100, with costs of prosecutipn." . Theefl'eet of thia. stAtute is to make any matter concerning lotteries unmailable, and subjecta the.persQDssending such matter by mail to the penalty therein provided. It appears from the prooLthat the city of Vienna"in the empire of Austl'1a, in 1874, issued bonds· for 100 guilders the;amount of 30,000 1000 guilders, to be refunded within 50