Although the above indictment may have been legal in form, it clearly proved the inadequacy of man alone to frame just laws, holding, as it did, Susan B. Anthony to be "then and there a person of the female sex, contrary to the form of the statutes of the United States of America," etc.
Witnesses were first called on behalf of the United States; during whose examination it was again conceded that the women named in the indictment were women on the 5th day of November, 1872, thus again clearly showing the animus of these trials to be against sex—making sex a crime in the eye of United States laws. While the right to testify in her own behalf was denied to Miss Anthony it was granted to the Inspectors of election.
Beverly W. Jones, and each of the other defendants, was duly sworn as a witness in his own behalf, and Susan B. Anthony was called as a witness in behalf of the defendants.
Miss Anthony: I would like to know if the testimony of a person who has been convicted of a crime can be taken?
The Court: They call you as a witness, madam.
The witness, having been duly affirmed, testified as follows:
Examined by Mr. Van Voorhis:
Q. Miss Anthony, I want you to state what occurred at the Board of Registry, when your name was registered? A. That would be very tedious, for it was full an hour.
Q. State generally what was done, or what occupied that hour's time?
Objected to.
Q. Well, was the question of your right to be registered a subject of discussion there? A. It was.
Q. By and between whom? A. Between the supervisors, the inspectors, and myself.
Q. State, if you please, what occurred when you presented yourself at the polls on election day? A. Mr. Hall decidedly objected—
Mr. Crowley: I submit to the Court that unless the counsel expects to change the version given by the other witnesses, it is not necessary to take up time.
The Court: As a matter of discretion, I don't see how it will be any benefit. It was fully related by the others, and doubtless correctly.
Mr. Crowley: It is not disputed.
The Witness: I would like to say, if I might be allowed by the Court, that the general impression that I swore I was a male citizen, is an erroneous one.
Mr. Van Voorhis: You took the two oaths there, did you? A. Yes, sir.
The Court: You presented yourself as a female, claiming that you had a right to vote? A. I presented myself not as a female at all, sir; I presented myself as a citizen of the United States. I was called to the United States ballot-box by the XIV. Amendment, not as a female, but as a citizen, and I went there.
Miss Anthony's emphatic reply and intimation that, although a condemned criminal for having voted, she still believed in her citizenship as securing that right to her, closed the lips of the Court, and she was summarily dismissed from the witness-box, and the case rested.
Mr. Van Voorhis addressed the Court at some length, submitting that there was no ground whatever to charge these defendants (the Inspectors) with any criminal offense,
1. Because the women who voted were legal voters. 2. Because they were challenged and took the oaths which the statute requires of Electors, and the Inspectors had no right, after such oath, to reject their votes. 3. Because no malice is shown. Whether the women were entitled to have their names registered and to vote, or not, the defendants believed they had such right, and acted in good faith, according to their best judgment, in allowing the registry of their names—and in receiving their votes—and whether they decided right or wrong in point of law, they are not guilty of any criminal offense.
These points were amplified by the counsel at some length, who closed by saying, "The defendants should be discharged by the Court." Mr. Crowley then rose to make his argument, when the Court said: