Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 10.djvu/745

 UNITED STATES V. BUNTIN. 733 �1. It incidentally appeared in the progress of tiie examination of the witnesses that a civil suit had beeii prosecated against the defendant to recover damages for the deprivation of the rights of the prosecuting witness alleged in the indictment in this case ; and it is insisted by counsel that that civil suit in which damaf?es were recovered "ex- hausted the remedy," and bars this prosecution. This defence, gen- tlemen, cannot be maintained. The prosecution and recoveiy in the civil suit does net, in the least, preclude the government from the prosecution of this indictment. The civil suit was for the wrong inflicted on the individual; this indictment is for the wrong done, or supposed to have been done, to the public; and the resuit of the for- mer case can in no way affect the resuit to be reached in this one. �2. The defendant has been permitted to introduce witnesses to prove that he is a man of good character. The law presumed as much before the evidence was adduced. This evidence was followed by an elaborate argument, supported by numerous authorities, to impress the court with its importance and value. The authorities are all right. But have they any application to the facts of this case? The de- fendant has testified in his own behalf, and upon his examination admitted that a separate school had been provided for the education of the colored children of his district, to which he thought the pros- ecuting witness ought to have gone ; that notwithstanding the re- quest of the trustees to defendant to receive and instruct the prosecut- ing witness in the school which he was teaching, he thought he had no right to be taught there; and that, acting under color of the law which provided a separate school for colored children, and because the prosecuting witness was a colored boy, he, the defendant, declined to permit him to enter the school taught by him, but excluded him therefrom. Such is the testimony of the defendant himself. There is, then, nothing left in the case on which the evidence of defend- ant's good character eau have any legitimate bearing. If a defend- ant, being indicted for a breach of a criminal law, admits all the ele- ments that enter into and constitute the crime, of what avail is good character ? If defendant were to deny the facts alleged in the in- dictment ; if he were to insist that the evidence on the part of the prosecution was untrue ; if he were to make and present an issue of fact as between himself and other witnesses, or even stand upon his plea of "not guilty," — then, and in either of such events, the jury, in passing upon the question of defendant's guilt or innocence, would be authorized to consider the evidence of his good character, and give to it just as much weight as they in their judgment believed, in view ��� �