ch
jurors "may take into consideration" or not, at their pleasure,
but which they must take into consideration, because, in case the
ignorance exists, no matter from what cause, the offense which
the statute describes is not committed. In such case, ignorance
of the law is not interposed as a shield to one committing a
criminal act, but merely to show, as it does show, that no
criminal act has been committed. I quote from Sir Matthew Hale on
the subject. Speaking of larceny, the learned author says:

As it is _cepit_ and _asportavit_, so it must be _felonice_,
or _animo furandi_, otherwise it is not felony, for it is
the mind that makes the taking of another's goods to be a
felony, or a bare trespass only; but because the intention
and mind are secret, the intention must be judged of by the
circumstances of the fact, and these circumstances are
various, and may sometimes deceive, yet regularly and
ordinarily these circumstances following direct in the case.
If A., thinking he hath a title to the house of B., seizeth
it as his own ... this regularly makes no felony, but a
trespass only; but yet this may be a trick to color a
felony, and the ordinary discovery of a felonious intent is,
if the party doth it secretly or being charged with the
goods denies it. (1 Hale's P. C, 509.)

I concede, that if Miss Anthony voted, knowing that as a woman
she had no right to vote, she may properly be convicted, and that
if she had dressed herself in men's apparel, and assumed a man's
name, or resorted to any other artifice to deceive the board of
inspectors, the jury might properly regard her claim of right to
be merely colorable, and might, in their judgment, pronounce her
guilty of the offense charged, in case the constitution has not
secured to her the right she claimed. All I claim is, that if she
voted in perfect good faith, believing that it was her right, she
has committed no crime. An innocent mistake, whether of law or
fact, though a wrongful act may be done in pursuance of it, can
not constitute a crime.

[The following cases and authorities were referred to and
commented upon by the counsel, as sustaining his positions:
U. S. _vs._ Conover, 3 McLean's Rep.,