Sentence for election Fraud.
--
In Philadelphia on Tuesday last,
Wm. Byerly, for defeating a Congressman in that city by forging returns against him, was sentenced.
The
Ledger says:
‘
Mr. Byerly was directed to stand up to receive his sentence.
Judge Thompson remarked he was happy to say that this was the first time an offence of this character had ever been sustained against a party in this country.
In a community like this, and under institutions like ours, which depend upon the honesty and integrity of those who are selected to perform any high and important duty, there was no offence which more directly struck at the perpetuity of our institutions than that which had been laid to the defendant's charge.
His act could not be justified.
It had been alleged that it could not be possible for the defendant to do this thing, as he was unable to read and write with facility, and that, therefore, he had been the subject of a conspiracy.
The jury had decided otherwise.
They had regarded the defendant in the light of one who had undertaken to perform a high public duty, and had then committed the fraud.
There could be no doubt but that there were others engaged in this transaction who were more intelligent than the defendant, by reason of their superior education, but whether they were more skilled in matters relating to elections might be questioned.
Whoever they might be it did not affect the greatness of the offence laid to the defendant, who was the active agent.
The jury who tried the case was of the prisoner's own selection, through able and watchful counsel, and after the full exercise of the right to challenge.
With the verdict as rendered by this jury the court had no reason to complain.
There was no reason to believe but that the jury were actuated by conscientious motives, and with a desire to do their duty.
The sentence was then imposed.
It was a fine of $300, and an imprisonment of two years and six months in the
County Prison.
’
