Summary

United States v. Malphurs — Opinion of the Court

In the District Court, a demurrer to an indictment was sustained on the sole ground that sections 3 and 4 of the Hatch Act, 'An act to prevent pernicious political activities' approved August 2, 1939, 53 Stat. 1147, set out below [1] were inapplicable to a state primary. [2] Neither the assignment of errors nor the jurisdictional statement specifies any other statute under which the indictment might have been found.
Source: Wikisource

United States v. Malphurs — Opinion of the Court

It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, to promise any employment, position, work, compensation, or other benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any act of congress, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in any election.'↑ It is to be noted that this indictment relates to acts occurring prior to the approval of the amendment ofJuly 19, 1940, 54 Stat.
Source: Wikisource

United States v. Malphurs — Opinion of the Court

Defendants, employees of the Works Progress Administration and a municipal Chief of Police, were indicted under Count I for threatening, on May 6, 1940, to deprive a named person of employment, made possible by an Act of Congress, unless he voted for and supported in the Florida primary, defendants' candidates for various national and state offices, and under Count II for promising on May 23rd continued and more remunerative employment if that person did support them.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature