Page images
PDF
EPUB

a conspiracy to obtain patents to Government land for the benefit of a corporation to be thereafter formed, in excess of the acreage which such corporation could lawfully obtain through direct entry; and as overt acts, the verification of applications for entry by others, the verification by some of defendants of affidavits that there were no minerals in the land, the filing in the Land Office by the conspirators, of the application of the entrymen, the payment by the conspirators of the statutory price of the land, the payment to the entrymen of ten dollars a piece for making the entries, and conveying to th acquired.R

3 U. S. v. Wells, C. C. A., 192 Fed. 870. In Williamson v. U. S., 207 U. S. 425, 448, 449, 28 Sup. Ct. 163, 52 L. ed. 278, held to be sufficient to charge: that an unlawful conspiracy and combination was entered into on a date and at a place named within the district; that the object of the conspiracy was the suborning of a large number of persons to go before a United States Commissioner of the District of Oregon duly named, and in proceedings for the entry and purchase of lands therein under the Timber and Stone Act, make oath before the Commissioner, that the lands "were not being purchased by them on speculation, but were being purchased in good faith to be appro priated to the own exclusive use and benefit of those persons, respectively, and that they had not directly or indirectly made any agreement, or contract in any way or manner, with any other person, or persons whomsoever, by which the titles which they might acquire from the said United States in and to such lands should inure in whole or in part to the benefit of any person except themselves, when, in truth and in fact, as each of the said persons

r

corporation the rights thereby

would then well know, and as they, the said John Newton Williamson, Van Gesner, and Marion R. Biggs, would then well know, such persons would be applying to purchase such lands on speculation, and not in good faith, appropriate such lands to their own exclusive use and benefit respectively, and would have made agreements and contracts with them, the said John Newton Williamson, Van Gesner, and Marion R. Biggs, by which the titles which they might acquire from the said United States in such lands would inure to the benefit of the said John Williamson and Van Gesner, then and before then engaged in the business of sheep raising in said country; the matters so to be stated, subscribed, and sworn by the said persons being material matter under the circumstances, and matters which the said persons so to be suborned, instigated, and procured, and the said John Newton Williamson, Van Gesner, and Marion R. Biggs, would not believe to be true; and the said Marion R. Biggs, United States Commissioner as aforesaid, when administer ing such oaths to those persons, being an officer and person authorized by law of the said United States to

In this case four of the defendants were removed from their homes in another district to the district where the Land Office was situated, although they had never been there and the entrymen resided in another district, and the grand jury of the district from which they were removed had refused to indict them.5 An indictment will lie for a conspiracy to jump a claim by the use of force against the rightful owner thereof."

§ 506t. Indictments arising out of bankruptcy and therewith connected. By the bankruptcy law of July 1, 1898: "a. A person shall be punished, by imprisonment for a period not to exceed five years, upon conviction of the offense of having knowingly and fraudulently appropriated to his own use, embezzled, spent, or unlawfully transferred any property or secreted or destroyed any document belonging to a bankrupt estate which came into his charge as trustee.

"b. A person shall be punished, by imprisonment for a period not to exceed two years, upon conviction of the offense of having knowingly and fraudulently (1) concealed while a bankrupt, or after his discharge, from his trustee any of the property belonging to his estate in bankruptcy; or (2) made a false oath or account in, or in relation to, any proceeding in bankruptcy; (3) presented under oath any false claim for proof against the estate of a bankrupt, or used any such claim in composition personally

administer the said oaths, and the said oaths being oaths administered in cases where a law of the said United States would then authorize an oath to be administered." The court said, "These allegations plainly import, and they are susceptible of no other construction than that the unlawful agreement contemplated a future solicitation of individuals to enter lands, who in so doing would necessarily knowingly state and subscribe under oath material false statements as to their purpose in respect to entering the land, etc., and known to be such by the conspirators. There is no reason to infer that the details of the unlawful conspiracy and agreement are

not fully stated in the indictment, and it may, therefore, be assumed that the persons who were to be suborned, and the time and place of such subornation, had not been determined at the time of the conspiracy, except as might be inferred from a purpose to procure the persons to be suborned to come before the United States Commissioner for the District of Oregon named in an indictment."

4 Ibid.

5 Ibid.; the author was counsel for the defendants when the charges against them were made before the grand jury which refused to act.

6 U. S. v. Waddell, 112 U. S. 76, 5 Sup. Ct. 35, 28 L. ed. 673.

or by agent, proxy, or attorney, or as agent, proxy, or attorney; or (4) received any material amount of property from a bankrupt after the filing of the peittion, with intent to defeat this Act; or (5) extorted or attempted to extort any money or property from any person as a consideration for acting or forbearing to act in bankruptcy proceedings.

"c. A person shall be punished by fine, not to exceed five hundred dollars, and forfeit his office, and the same shall thereupon become vacant, upon conviction of the offense of having knowingly (1) acted as a referee in a case in which he is directly or indirectly interested; or (2) purchased, while a referee, directly or indirectly, any property of the estate in bankruptcy of which he is referee; or (3) refused, while a referee or trustee, to permit a reasonable opportunity for the inspection of the accounts relating to the affairs of, and the papers and records of, estates in his charge by parties in interest when directed by the court so to do.

"d. A person shall not be prosecuted for any offense arising under this Act unless the indictment is found or the information is filed in court within one year after the commission of the offense.'' 1

The one year statute of limitations does not apply to a conspiracy to commit a violation of the bankruptcy act.2 A prosecution for such a conspiracy is not barred for three years.3 "Conceal shall include secrete, falsify and mutilate."4 The concealment must be a positive act.5 Secretly keeping property already in the possession of the bankrupt and withholding it from the trustee, under circumstances indicating an intention to defraud and conceal, may amount to concealment within the meaning of the statute. A continuous concealment after the

§ 506t. 1 Ch. 541, 30 St. at L. 554, 29, Comp. St., § 9613.

2 U. S. v. Rabinowitz, 238 U. S. 78, 59 L. ed. 1211.

3 U. S. R. S., § 1044, amended April 13, 1876, ch. 56, 19 St. at L. 32, Comp. St., § 1708.

4 Act of July 1, 1898, ch. 541, 30 St. at L. 544, 545, § 1, Comp. St., § 9585.

5 Gretsch v. U. S., C. C. A., 231 Fed. 57.

6 Glass v. U. S., C. C. A., 231 Fed. 65. It was there held that evidence that defendant, shortly before the petition was filed against him, removed his books and disposed of a large part of his goods, which were then in the district in which the bankruptcy proceedings were subse

adjudication of bankruptcy is an offense within the statute when the property was previously physically converted and concealed.7 Concealment of the property may be accomplished without conversion. The mere omission of property from the schedule is not punishable as a concealment.9 If intentional, it is punished under the clause of the statute penalizing "a false oath or account." 10

There can be no indictment for concealment in a district where the property concealed has never been,11 but an indictment for a conspiracy to conceal such property may be found in such district if an overt act was there committed.12 filing there' of a petition in voluntary bankruptcy is such an overt act.13

The

A count contains a sufficient charge of concealment from the trustee when it begins with averments substantially following the language of the statute and alleges the bankrupt's acquisi tion of such property, the appointment of a receiver, that while he was a bankrupt he knowingly, wilfully, and fraudulently concealed such property from the receiver, that a trustee was selected, appointed and qualified, and that, after such selection, appointment, and qualification, the bankrupt continued to conceal knowingly, fraudulently, wilfully, and unlawfully from the trustee, such property belonging to the estate in bankruptcy, and while he was a bankrupt. The unnecessary averment as to the concealment from the receiver does not impair the sufficiency of the indictment.14

Such an indictment is sufficient when it alleges that the bankrupt knowingly and fraudulently concealed before or after his discharge as the case may be from his trustee property belonging to his estate in bankruptcy with as full a description of the prop

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

erty as the nature of the case will allow.15 A statement that the property consisted of money and merchandise of the value of a specified amount, said merchandise being women's and children's clothing and ready to wear garments, general clothing, dry goods, and merchandise and being of the general kind and description manufactured and handled at wholesale and retail at his place of business which was specified, a more particular description of said merchandise being to these grand jurors unknown, and a more particular description of the denomination, kind and character of said money being also to these grand jurors at this time unknown contrary to the form, force, and effect of the act of Congress in such case is sufficient.16

Such an indictment may be sustained by evidence that on a certain date the defendant had property there of a certain value and that when he became bankrupt, about four months later, the aggregate of all the property and money he turned over to his trustee was much less than he owned on the former date.17 It is sufficient to charge a concealment by using the word "conceal." 18 The manner in which the concealment was accomplished need not be set forth in the indictment.19 The indictment need not negative that the property concealed was exempt from execution.20 An allegation that the concealment took place at a specified city in the district sufficiently alleges the time and place.21 Where the charge was conspiracy, a demurrer was sustained to an indictment for conspiracy by bankrupts to make and file a false account of their assets and liabilities when the period of the conspiracy laid in the indictment was: "On, to wit, the first day of January, A. D. 1913, and on divers days and times between said first day of January, A. D. 1913, and the twentieth day of September, A. D. 1913," and the only overt act alleged was the filing of a false schedule on September 20.22 A demurrer was overruled, when the indictment charged such a conspiracy which continued between certain specified dates, within which time.

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »