In re Massey
District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Rule to Show Cause why respondent should not be committed for contempt. In response to a rule to show cause why respondent., a county clerk, should not be committed for contempt in refusing to bring the ballots cast at a congressional election, before the grand jury the respondent filed the following answer: “The respondent would respectfully represent to this honorable court that, in compliance with the subpoena duces tecum served on Mm by the marshal of said district, a…
Read the full summary
Rule to Show Cause why respondent should not be committed for contempt. In response to a rule to show cause why respondent., a county clerk, should not be committed for contempt in refusing to bring the ballots cast at a congressional election, before the grand jury the respondent filed the following answer: “The respondent would respectfully represent to this honorable court that, in compliance with the subpoena duces tecum served on Mm by the marshal of said district, a certified copy of which, together with the orders of this honorable court under which the summons issued, and the return…
1Opinion of the CourtWietjams, J.
At a former day of this court, the United States district attorney, representing to the court that at the general election for members of congress, held on the 5th day of November, 1890, there was reason to believe that the judges of election for Welborn township, in Conway county, had not discharged their duties in accordance with the law, but had made a false return of the votes cast at that precinct at the election, and that he desired to lay said matter before the grand jury, then in session, and asked that a subpoena duces tecum issue to the respondent, the clerk of Conway county, to…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ex Parte SieboldSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Jones v. GlidewellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1890
3Cited by3 opinions
- State ex rel. Von Stade v. TaylorSupreme Court of Missouri · 1909
- In re CohenCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1932
- In Re PostSupreme Court of Vermont · 1941