United States v. Coons
Opinion of the Court
(charging jury). The defendant in this ease is indicted for perjury, under section 13 of the act of congress, approved March 3, 1825, which reads, as follows : “If any person in any case, matter, hearing, or other proceeding, when an oath or affirmation shall be required to be taken or administered under or by any law or laws of the United States, shall, upon the taking of such oath or affirmation knowingly and willingly swear or affirm falsely, every person so offending shall be deemed guilty of perjury,” etc.
To justify a verdict of guilty in this case, the jury must be satisfied by the evidence that the defendant was sworn; that he was sworn in a ease, matter, hearing, or other proceeding, when an oath or affirmation shall be required to be taken or administered under or by any law or laws of the United States, and that he knowingly and willingly swore to that which was false. It must also appear by the evidence that the oath was administered to him by the person named in the indictment, and that such person had authority to administer the oath. The proper evidence of the pendency of a suit between Benjamin A. Earl and the Madison Insurance Company, in the circuit court of the United States, in the state of Indiana, is the record of the court. During the progress of the case, the question has arisen, was the commissioner, MeGuffey, duly authorized to take the defendant’s deposition? The circuit court of the United States in Indiana was fully competent to give him such authority. It will be for the jury to say, from the evidence, whether the defendant swore falsely, with a wicked and corrupt intent to falsify in regard to matters alleged in the indictment to be false. The jury will have the defendant’s deposition and will compare it with the indictment. There are. several distinct assignments of perjury in the indictment, and the defendant can not be convicted except as to matters therein charged. A conviction can not be had on the assignment, respecting the quantity of stock Filley & Chapin had on hand, as the averment of the indictment is, that in December, 1854, and in the month of January, 1852. they had a large amount of stock on hand, while the statement of the defendant, in his deposition, is. that in the month of December, 1851, and' about the' first, of the month of January, 1852, they had but a small- amount of stock on hand. Any discrepancy between what the defendant swore •to in his deposition, and what is set out in the indictment as having been sworn to by him, is fatal to a conviction. The assignment principally relied on by the prosecution is that respecting the filling up of the boxes with leather chips. Was this statement false? It must, to authorize a conviction, be disproved by two witnesses, or one witness and corroborating circumstances. The facts will be for the jury to determine from the evidence. If they believe the defendant to have sworn willfully false in testifying, as alleged in the indictment, it will be their duty to convict. The prosecution relies upon the testimony of the three Chapins and Earl, and has also proved some confessions of the defendant made by him while in jail. Confessions of an accused person should always be cautiously received. The jury are the exclusive judges of the credibility of evidence. It appears from the testimony that the Chapins were implicated in a case arising out of the burning of the steamboat “Martha Washington,”
The jury returned a verdict of not guilty.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.