2O _ FEDEBAL~REPOR1‘EB· · ~ _
6. Cnrmmn. P1uc·rrcm—AnnareNmnNr, AND Pam. s   . V
Where a defendant was not arraigned and made no plea before the trial,
but was identified, knew exactly the oifense charged, denied the charge, went
to trial on the denial, and went upon the witness stand and there denied the
offense, and was convicted, held, that he was not entitled,.under the federal
statutes, to a new trial, because of the failure of the record to show an ar~
raignment and plea, for the reason that the irregularity was a " defect or im-
perfection inmatter ofform only, "4within the meaning of section 1025, Rev.
  t. U. S., and did not tend to his prejudice.
,7. SAME-Exrnnr Evrnnnon. ‘ f ‘
  " The jury in a criminal case are not bound by expert evidence as to hand-
. writing any further than it_coincides with their own opinions,;or than they
think it deserves to be credited. _ »
Indictment under Rev. St. U. S. ,,§ 5512, for fraudulent registration of
voters in St. Louis, Missouri. it c p , _ _ M _
. _ For Missouri statuterelative to registration ofvoters in` cities of over
1,000, see Sess. Laws Mo. 1883,_p.,38. , U ,   `
There was no formal arraignment and plea. A q , ` V Q
Thomas P. Bashaw, for the United States. `
_ Naplon do Frost, for defendant. V . ` r — _ . .
Tnarmn, J .,.(chargi·ng jury.) If the testimony in this case satisnes
you beyond any reasonable doubt that this defendant was adeputy re- _
corder of voters fo1· the Twelfth ward of this city at the registration held
last September, for the November election of the year 1886, and that as
such recorder of voters, having the registration books in his custody, he
"knowingly and willfully," and not merely through ignorance or inad-
vertence, entered therein, or caused to be entered in such books, the
names of any of the persons named in this indictment, as though they
were qualified and duly registered voters, when in point of fact such per-
sons did not appear before him or apply for registration or takethe oath
required of voters. then you will find him guilty. You may infer that
· he was actuated by some evil or fraudulent motive, if he committed the
act charged in this indictment "'knowingly and willfully," and not merely
through inadvertence or ignorance of his official duties. You may judge
of the credibility of all of the witnesses, and give their testimony such
` weight as you think it deserves. _ _
‘ The testimony of the expert as to handwriting is simply an expression
under oath of an opinion which he entertains, and you are not bound
by it any further than it coincides with your own opinion based on the
· examination you have made of the handwriting in question, or than you
think it deserves to be credited with on account of the experience he has
i had in comparing handwriting. ·
V Now, on -the other hand, you will give the defendant the full benefit
of the presumption that he is an innocent man, and you will not con-
vict him unless the g¤»+emme¤t‘ has proven the charge in the indictment
beyond any fair or reasonable doubt; and even though you think that-
he wrote the names mentioned in the indictment, or caused some of
them to be entered on the registration books, when the persons did not
appear before him or take the oath, still youmust not convict him if the