The Fifteenth Amendment is considered in the following section.87

§ 340. Election offenses. As we have seen, congress has power to punish offenses at elections of representatives in congress even though state officers are voted for at the same time,88 but this power does not deprive the states of jurisdiction to punish such offenses.89 Except as granted by the Fifteenth Amendment, congress has no power to regulate elections of state officers, or to punish fraud or intimidation in connection therewith, but power to do so rests exclusively within the states.90 Presidential electors are state officers, within this rule,91 and hence state courts have jurisdiction to punish fraudulent voting for them.92 The Fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution declares that "the right of the citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States, or by any state, on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude,' and that congress "shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. But the authority given to congress by this amendment to punish offenses against the right of suffrage at state elections is limited to acts done under color of authority derived from state legislation, and does not extend to punishing individuals acting without authority.94

93

§ 341. Offenses against or by means of the mails. Larceny and embezzlement from the mails are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts, and an indictment therefor will not lie in a state court.95 But a state court may punish for breaking and enter

274, 4 Sup. Ct. 152. And see § 506, infra.

87 See § 340,

88 See § 26, supra.

89 Mason v. State, 55 Ark. 529, 18 S. W. 827. See also In re Green, 134 U. S. 377, 33 L. Ed. 951, 10 Sup. Ct. 586.

90 In re Green, 134 U. S. 377, 33 L. Ed. 951, 10 Sup. Ct. 586; United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 23 L. Ed. 588; United States v. Reese, 92 U. S. 214, 23 L. Ed. 563; United States v. Amsden, 6 Fed. 819.

91 In re Green, 134 U. S. 377, 33 L. Ed. 951, 10 Sup. Ct. 586. See also

United States V. United States
Brewers' Ass'n, 239 Fed. 163.

92 In re Green, 134 U. S. 377, 33 L.
Ed. 951, 10 Sup. Ct. 586; Mason v.
State, 55 Ark. 529, 18 S. W. 827.
93 U. S. Const. Amend. 15.

94 United States v. Amsden, 6 Fed. 819. See also United States V. Harris, 106 U. S. 629, 27 L. Ed. 290, 1 Sup. Ct. 601; United States v. Reese, 92 U. S. 214, 23 L. Ed. 563.

95 State v. McBride, Rice L. (S. C.) 400; Com. v. Feely, 1 Va. Cas. 321.

For a discussion of the federal statutes denouncing offenses against the postal service, see chap. 40, infra.

ing an office with intent to steal, though the office entered is a post office, and the breaking and entering is therefore also an offense against the federal statutes,96 or for murder of a person committed by derailing a mail train of which he was the engineer, although the derailing of such a train is an offense against the United States.97 And a state may punish for an offense committed through the mails as a medium,98 and may punish a mail carrier who violates the law governing the use of vehicles on its highways.99

2

§ 342. Offenses against national banks. A state cannot punish the making of false entries in the books of a national bank1 nor the embezzlement of the funds of a national bank by an officer, agent or clerk thereof, for these offenses are covered by acts of congress, and the jurisdiction of the federal courts is exclusive. Nor can it punish an officer of such a bank for receiving deposits in the bank with knowledge of its insolvency. A state may, however, punish an officer of such a bank for stealing or embezzling property specially deposited by a customer for safe-keeping, or for receiving and aiding in the concealment of money stolen from such a bank, in the absence of any legislation by congress on those subjects. A state may also punish the forgery of promissory notes made payable to or at, or drawn on a national bank, or the publishing or uttering of such a forged instrument, by an officer or employee of the bank, although the same act is also an offense under the federal statutes.®

Pennsylvania. Com. v. Ketner, 92 Pa. St. 372, 37 Am. Rep. 692. And see Com. v. Barry, 116 Mass. 1.

Nor can it punish an accessary to such offense, though he may not be punishable under the act of congress. Com. v. Felton, 101 Mass. 204.

3 Easton v. Iowa, 188 U. S. 220, 47 L. Ed. 452, 23 Sup. Ct. 288, rev'g 113 Iowa 516, 85 N. W. 795, 86 Am. St. Rep. 389. State v. Willis, 130 Tenn. 403, 170 S. W. 1030.

4 As where a package of bonds.or plate is specially deposited in its vaults, since it is not the property of the bank. State v. Tuller, 34 Conn. 280; Com. v. Tenney, 97 Mass. 50.

5 Com. v. Barry, 116 Mass. 1.

6 Cross v. North Carolina, 132 U. S. 131, 33 L. Ed. 287, 10 Sup. Ct. 47,

And this is true though such officer makes false entries on the books of the bank based on the forged instrument, which is an offense under the federal statutes. And it has been held that a state may punish the larceny of property of a national bank by its officers, though the same act may be punishable as embezzlement under the act of congress.R

§ 343. Counterfeiting. The fact that the federal constitution gives congress the power to provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities or coin of the United States, and that congress has done so, does not give congress exclusive jurisdiction, but the states may also punish the counterfeiting of such securities and coin, or the uttering or circulating of such counterfeit coin or securities,' 10 or having the same in possession with intent to pass or utter them,1 or having in possession implements, dies or plates for the making of the same,12 within their limits as an offense against the state. And a state may also punish the counterfeiting of securities of foreign

aff'g 101 N. C. 770, 7 S. E. 715, 9 Am. St. Rep. 53; Hoke v. People, 122 Ill., 511, 13 N. E. 823.

7 Cross v. North Carolina, 132 U. S. 131, 33 L. Ed. 287, 10 Sup. Ct. 47, aff'g 101 N. C. 770, 7 S. E. 715, 9 Am. St. Rep. 53.

8 Com. v. Barry, 116 Mass. 1.

9 Indiana. Snoddy v. Howard, 51 Ind. 411, 19 Am. Rep. 738; Chess v. State, 1 Black f. 198.

11

Virginia. Jett v. Com., 18 Gratt. 933; Hendrick v. Com., 5 Leigh 707. Contra State v. Brown, 2 Ore. 221. 10 Fox v. Ohio, 5 How. (U. S.) 410; Moore v. Illinois, 4 How. (U. S.) 13, aff'g Eells v. People, 4 Scam. (Ill.) 498; Ex parte Geisler, 50 Fed. 411; Jones v. Com., 1 Ky. Opinions 531; In re Truman, 44 Mo. 181, overruling Mattison v. State, 3 Mo. 421.

Counterfeit bills or notes of the bank of the United States. State v. Tutt, 2 Bailey (S. C.) 44, 21 Am. Dec. 508; State v. Pitman, 1 Brev. (S. C.) 32, 2 Am. Dec. 645.

11 State v. McPherson, 9 Iowa 53; Com. v. Fuller, 8 Metc. (49 Mass.) 313, 41 Am. Dec. 509.

Bills of the Bank of the United States. State v. Randall, 2 Aik. (Vt.) 89.

Contra Ex parte Houghton, 8 Fed.

897.

12 People v. White, 34 Cal. 183; Snoddy v. Howard, 51 Ind. 411, 19 Am. Rep. 738; State v. Brown, 2 Ore.

221.

89.

governments, or the uttering of such counterfeit securities, or having in possession plates from which such counterfeits may be printed, although such acts are made an offense by the federal statutes.18

§ 344. Perjury. An indictment will lie in either the federal 14 or state 15 courts for perjury committed in a naturalization proceeding in a state court. But an indictment will not lie in a state court for perjury committed in a case in a federal court,1 or before a United States land officer,1 17 or before a United States commissioner in a proceeding under an act of congress, 18 or before a notary public designated by congress to take depositions in a contest of an election of a representative in congress, 19 or before a commissioner or referee in bankruptcy appointed under an act of congress.20

§ 345. Other illustrations. A state may punish the forgery of a power of attorney to receive warrants for lands granted for military services under an act of congress,21 or the fraudulent issuing of land warrants by a state officer, though the title to the land covered by them is in the United States.22 A state may also prohibit and punish

the use of the national flag for advertising purposes, at least in the absence of any legislation by congress on the subject,23 and it may punish for obtaining money or property by false pretenses 24 or by threats to accuse one of crime,25 or for larceny of property belonging to an individual from a government warehouse,26 or for enticing a woman from her home in the state, for immoral purposes,27 though the same acts may involve a violation of the federal statutes. And in so far as disloyal slanders and libels of government officials cause or tend to cause breaches of the peace, they are offenses against the state, and can be prosecuted only in the state courts.28 But state courts have no jurisdiction of the offense of stealing property belonging to the United States.29 And they have no jurisdiction to punish soldiers of a foreign government for killing United States soldiers in battle while a state of war exists between the two countries, but they can be punished, if at all, only by the federal government.30 Congress has power to prescribe the terms and conditions under which labor shall be performed in the construction of public works of the United States, even though such works may be erected upon. land over which the state retains political jurisdiction. And an act of congress providing for the punishment of persons who falsely assume or pretend to be officers or employees of the federal government does not encroach upon the functions of the states, even though it is broad enough to include cases where there is no such office or

23 Halter v. Nebraska, 205 U. S. 34, 51 L. Ed. 696, 27 Sup. Ct. 419, 10 Ann. Cas. 525, aff'g 74 Neb. 757, 105 N. W. 298, 7 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1079, 121 Am. St. Rep. 754.

24 So it may punish a person for obtaining goods on credit by fraudulent representations as to solvency, though such fraud may also be punishable under the Bankruptcy Act. Abbott v. People, 75 N. Y. 602.

Or for obtaining money by falsely pretending that the defendant was a government employee, though such representation would be within the federal statute punishing persons who falsely assume or pretend to be government officers or employees. Pearce v. State, 115 Ala. 115, 22 So. 502.

25 Sexton v. California, 189 U. S.

319, 47 L. Ed. 833, 23 Sup. Ct. 543, aff'g 132 Cal. 37, 64 Pac. 107.

26 For stealing whisky deposited in a government warehouse pending the payment of the internal revenue tax thereon, although the federal statutes make it a crime to remove it before the lien for taxes is satisfied. State v. Harmon, 104 N. C. 792, 10 S. E. 474.

27 See § 1509, infra.

28 United States v. Hall, 248 Fed. 150.

29 Ex parte Roach, 166 Fed. 344. 30 As where soldiers were killed in a raid into Texas by Mexican troops. Arce v. State, 83 Tex. Cr. 292, 202 S. W. 951.

31 United States v. San Francisco Bridge Co., 88 Fed. 891.