The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1843-11-17
United states District Court

action brought by the Government against Adams Co
who rum among others, express between Boston Nsr
carry ing letters in conraventon of the several
tusng the Post Once aud particularly the act Of I'd OF
The brought under thu I'd section Of the &C,
which prohibits any persons from carrying,
procuring 10 he carried. any letters for pay, SC.
On the part OF the Government II that upon
,ne occasion man named Stevens, who was egen to de
sudsuts received some 81 or 50 for carrying letters from
Boston TO Norwich and that several other occasions
lumber ofpsrces containing letters left Adams
Cos ONCE and that they procured them to be forwarded
their respective d. situations. They also proved tina,
nce the establishment of those express lines the Post
once revenue had fallen off nearly 5000 quarter.
Ga the part of defendants is coneoded that they do
DOT come within the provisions OF the statute nasmuch
does not prohibit the carrying of parcels and that they
nave never knowingly sent or procured to be SENT
open any parcels that might be to their establish
ment They proved that tie man Stevens only
iay employed by them in consequence OF the illness Of
their regular agent and that they had know ledge
MS having received any money as alleged by plaintiff.
The case was given to the Jury yesterday utter noon
'' $50 '''' CHARGE.
GsNTLsMEr This case presents one Of those ques
tons with which Courts of Law are so frequent.
| " engaged-whether or no the facts which havt
been brought before the Court pro ably cam, with
10 the Purviaw Of the Legislature when the penal Law
was being enscted II Is said that the business ofthe de
PENDANTS conducted in manner as to Involve
violation Of the Pos, Office laws This business OF the
three years but branch Of has been in operation
several years longer. aud has, is alleged greatly
| eucroaCneu on the fost Omce laws. The essential
questions before you are, frst, what the facts
proved by the government and what the Inv in rels
ion to them' The governme say that they prove thai
ne defendants carried letters between New York and
Boston, in three manners and ways Fhst in pack
goodshe ,mmu aica ions going with these goads the
individuals who them and ed under
whatever form, they letters and subjecto posage-
Any written communication between individual aud
another within the malable matter and no
matter in what shape is put is liable postage
carried by mail They say that the defendants carried
the letters in packages IRON merchants and that the let,
hu
Fisher received par GELS with money in them and deliver
ed them to their address, and the necessary implication
that these packages contained money. There is
controversy however. this subject the other side
20 whether either of these facts shown in proof 1t
the papers delivered to him were letters and were
CARR. by him from New York to Boston, and that Ste
vens in so doing was acting the part OF the defendants
The latter allegation however, must be proved 1t
be shown by direct proof, or by implication II it wac
his act and heid 90 il agent ofthe defendants
then they cannot be Ii be ulder the penal law although
1t might be violation of the statute As to the
nation OF the offence, how far the required
show that letter necessary only for them
show that what the party took purported TO be letter
Government has no power to open such package
certain IN that the TACT as TO its character But il
have the appearance OF letter. it assumed to be
al The con rary is proved. Government need only
that paper which seemed to be letter carried and
order upset the alleg alton that letter II the
testimony iha any individual received letter with the
Erection to carry il, and that he took and from
New York to Boston, the implication is thst he per-
formed the trust end If any fact exist TO the contra
ry, it is for him 10 show it, and leave the
jury to say how far it takes away from the
assertion that it was letter. Again. in relation 10
whether there or letters, tho Individual
hat deliver ed said twss paper the upper part
OF which the direction to London" was written but he
did not the superscrpon Of of the letters
m the parcel But they all seemed 10 beletters and in
law that sufficient TO show that they were, until
contrary wn aud the natural conclusion that
the Who'll pile OF papers consisted of letters the upper
one appeared to be letter. and the defendants show
that The 9th were waste papers On taking
be proved that Stevens carried pile Of letters from
New fork to Boston, and Fisher ALSO ard that the pack
ages ordinarily contained letters the question arises
does this amount to act by the Statute
What Congress had in view to nterdct the carriage
of letters the road which the mail 10 conveyed by
any other mode than that prescribed by law, end in
his prohibition water craft were also included
was the object to prevent stages or water craft
carrying persons having leiters7 do persons car
rying letters in such sagss render the them
responsible for violation Of the post office laws7 Does
steamboat convey ing person having trunk Of letters
come under tho act Of Congress1 apprehend not You
must give business construction to the act Congress
letters being carried by stages or wa
ter craft IL does not that person
ryins the letters should know II. The penalty the
saii about the owner being cogniZan
OF tue fact 1t may be well to revert to how the thing
was twenty years back, in order to illustrate my
them, an open box, such thing left in which
me letters were deposited. The master did not know
and the vessel then in the direct act of car
rjng Letters And under the
OF the goods competing the cargo he then carried letter
within the meaning oil the But when he conveyed
box which he could not open, and such box package
contained one letter. or thousand letters the act did
not apply to hem !. rot carriage Of letters within
he meaning of the act 1t carrying baggage only.
Nov ~astha offence against which Congress iegisla
t.di Their bus prevent the carriage Of letters
ny vessels or stage coaches So also in regard to sfge
cosche' they likewise had places TOR carrying these
letters which violated the law they would not have
violated the Law by carrying trunk with letters or pas
sengers with letters in their pockets But vas fosnd
Tar enough to protect the post office laws An
made accordingly, IN addition to amendment Of those
posed in ali this legislation that man could carry
letter from one piace to another without violating the
post ONCE laws There was no prohibition Of the convey
ance by private individuals of letter from one friend 10
4noher but If he made business OF carry letters then
amounted to the offence included in the statute Seven
or eight years back the running Of these expresses CON-
mencsd. and it Is said that they great OF de-
prving the regular mail Of of Dusi
1t may be evil OF great magnitude and there
indeed suppose from the testimony the Co.
vernmsnt has lost considerably by It, with that
Iteration we have nothing to do The question which
ats is whether the conduct Of the
defendants has ben in violation Of tue act the
cution OF this business was Legislature had has
sufficient time to during the last eight years
but they have not made il the subject legislation. 1t
however sad that IL violation OF the act OF rs My
either had some carriage conveyan which was
gagged to carry letters post road road parallel
20 post road 1t must BE- proved that the steamboat
New Haven vas in the prsctce Of carrying letters di
,inct from those enclosed In trunks and merchandise
that proved then must be shown that the defendants
the penalty of $50 fer offence think the great
difficulty Of the arises from the Oath section Of the
act to make applicable to the charge made against
the steamboat New Haven. But in order to give it as
much scope possible say that IL the steamboat carried
letters under the advemept, assistance and knowledge
Of the defendants, il is q violation Of the Bee il
the defendants used any sort Of carriage, matter what
call 1t crate or what you please from this place
Boston, for the purpose of carrying letters he is liable
the penalty But under this Law the defendants
liable for letters contained in a package, unless il
shown that they know these packages containeo
tanned the letters they liable although they
might have suspected that these packages contained let
tera Congress chooses 10 prevent such letters from
being carried in such way, they may do by land
welt as by water, and for which prohibited articles
board vessel though tbs captain or owner gnor
ant their being there, yet render them liable Blu until
Congress does such act the Court will suppos.
that Congress meant to punish who acted ignorant
doing wrong You must fod that the steamboat carried
letters and that the defendants accessory In aiding
and sustaining them In doing H. and also that they ban
vesse or no matter what in which they were placed