|
United States v. Morehead, 243 U.S. 607 (1917)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
United States v. Morehead, 243 U.S. 607 (1917)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 243 U.S. 592, click here.
United States v. Morehead No. 685 Argued March 14, 1917 Decided April 30, 1917 243 U.S. 607
ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
Syllabus
A charge of perjury may be based upon a valid regulation of the Land Department requiring an affidavit if the oath be taken "before a competent tribunal, officer or person." United States v. Smull, 236 U.S. 405.
The Land Department being expressly charged with the duty of enforcing the public land laws by appropriate regulations, its regulations in that regard, when duly promulgated, must be deemed valid if they are not unreasonable, inappropriate, or inconsistent with the acts of Congress.
A regulation of the Land Department requiring applicants for soldiers’ homesteads under Rev.Stats. § 2304 et seq., to make oath in their declaratory statements that their claims are for their exclusive use and benefit, for the purpose of actual settlement and cultivation, and not either directly or indirectly for the use or benefit of any other person, and that agents filing such statements have no right or interest, direct or indirect, in the filing thereof, is a valid regulation not adding to the conditions of the statute, but serving to effectuate its purpose.
The regulation of the Department providing that soldiers’ declaratory statements, when filed by agent, may be executed before any officer having a seal and authorized to administer oaths generally, is appropriate and valid, and an oath to such a statement taken before a state notary or clerk of court pursuant to such regulation violates the federal perjury statute, if the statement is material and false.
The case is stated in the opinion.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," United States v. Morehead, 243 U.S. 607 (1917) in 243 U.S. 607 243 U.S. 608. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=PH8W4Y45BAEUKSJ.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." United States v. Morehead, 243 U.S. 607 (1917), in 243 U.S. 607, page 243 U.S. 608. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=PH8W4Y45BAEUKSJ.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in United States v. Morehead, 243 U.S. 607 (1917). cited in 1917, 243 U.S. 607, pp.243 U.S. 608. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=PH8W4Y45BAEUKSJ.
|