Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/425

BTATE OF UELAWARE V. EMERSOK. 411 �Btate of Delaware ». Emebson and others. [Circuit Court, D, Dddware. June 22, 1881.) �1. CRnmiAii Law— FEDERAL Officbrs— Rbmoval of Cases— Rbv. St. i 643— �Paetebs. �The state authorities are the proper parties to continue the prosecution of officers of the United: States, against Tirhoin a prosecution was commenced in a State court for an act done under the provisions of title 26, "The Elective Franchise," of the Revised Btatutes, and removed by them, under the provis- ions of section 643 of the same statutes, to the circuit court of the United States. �2. DUTIBB OF UUTTED BTATKS ATTOKHETB. �It is the duty of the attorneys of the United States to act as counsel for such defendants. �3. Rbv. St. § 643, Construed. �Section 643 of the Revised Statutes contemplates a change of tribunal, not of prosecutiiig offlcera �Bbadpord, D. J. Arthur Emerson, Artemas Wilhelm, William J. Blackburn, John Blackbum, Jacob B. Smith, and Samuel Coyle were indioted at the November term of the "general sessions of the peace and jail delivery" of Delaware, sitting in and for New Castle county, for resisting certain special state officers appointed to keep the peace at an election for a representative in congress of the United States of America. Indictments were framed by the attorney general of the state, and true bills found by the grand jury of the state. These defendants were deputy marshals of the United States, authorized to act under the provisions of the Kevised Statutes to be found in section 2022, p. 556, (2d Ed.) Eev. St. Under the provisions of the said Revised Statutes, § 643, they were entitled to have their suits or cases transferred for arbitrament and final decision from the courts where the indictments were pending to the circuit court of the United States, and accordingly the requisite steps were taken by the United States attorney to accomplish that resuit, The said suits being thus transferred, and the defendants ready with their witnesses to proceed to trial, demanded (on motion by the United States attor- ney) that these cases be called, and either be proceeded with or that they be dismissed. The state of Delaware declined to take any part in the trial, and no authorized person appeared on behalf of the state. �The United Stafes attorney had no right or power to proseeute the pleas of the state, and not only so, but he considered himself counsel for these defendants; and he did this on a careful construction crf the statute, of its meaning, spirit, and purposes, and was so directed to consider himself their counsel by the attorney general of the United ��� �