New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1853-01-07


Postmaster Musson in relation TO the letter published by
US day or two concerning postage steamboat
cargo letters:
PosrOrrlcr, NrwoRLr,vs. Ia.
| Thursday. Jan @, 1858.
To he Editors al the PCapue-GrvTIrMrN In common
tn the Delta Crescent and Bulletin, You prexed yes
terday the publication of Mr. S oakeys letter and
the correspondence between him and Mr.. A. G. Penn NJ
G. with an editorial to the effect that all letters by
boat having relation to part of the cargo the
time conveyed ordering goods for the return trip
longer subject postage and be delivered direct
from the boat to the parties addressed.
hasten to offer the following remarks. that parties in
terested may not be led into error by the comments
yourselves and confrFres the decision given in Mr.
D lacobss letter Of sd December, 49,
You are right far letters relating the
cargo ac boo1 gt he bodf by which said letters are
brought such letters required be deposited in
the postoice or delivered to the local agent and when
so deposited delivered and charged with postage the
postage has invariably been RENTED upon the
ing opened in the presence OF the postmaster and found
| relate to the cargo.
But it is only that class of steamboat letters which is
exempt from postage all others such orders
for fright or emtances for purchases per trip
etc must pay postage though they hsd been conveyed
in the mail The law il imperative and will continue to be-
strictly enforced here well NewYork where the
following decision has recently been given;
DEFRAUprNG rHE PosroFFtcE-Ihe Supreme Court ha.
decided case of some Importance under the act for the
prevention OF frauds in the of the Postoce De-
partment The Captain Of the packet boat Empire which
regularly performed trips the canal between Albion and
Rochester, in the State of NewYork which line the
mail was transported under The authority the postoc
department was prosecuted for transporting otherwise
than in the mail divers letters packets and packages of
ptc
not having relation to the cargo
The evidence before the District Court showed that the
steward Of the boat carried from Albion Rochester an
unseacd letter or written order for tobacco which
order delivered The tobacco sent BY the return
boat and the steward received fifty his trouble
The District Court decided that the order was not letter
or maahe matter within the meaning af the act Of Con
gress, but was paper having different and distinct
chsreter oil ITS own and could be lawfully carried by the
SAID steward and they directed the jury to find for the
dttand9nt
The supreme Court has reversed the opinion deciding
that the letter or order not within exception of
the statute, it did relatct the cargo or to ANY ar
ec on board the boat 1t folded in the form Of let
Ter anu directed as such though sealed senl was
unt NECESSARY to constitute it letter make charge
able with postage The Supreme Court declared that it
was letter amt that its conveyance violation Of
law The opinion was gvcin by Mr. Justice Mclean
The Post-utiiec Department as has ba,n rrpeatedIy
By violations Of the law This Of the first
IN which the POstotce Department has been sustained
in legal controversies"
The only difference which is now made In compliance
with lr jacobs instructions Of 13l December iSj2 is
that the one cent way which is paid the for the
service rendered in taking Of AMI conveying letters
mot relating TO cargo outside Of the regular mail on
BOARD 0t said boat is longer added the prepaid or
unpaid postage Of said letters and longer claimed
the parties addressed The Department has decided
20 bear that expense itself and although Mr. jacobs re-
tcrs ouy to letters brought by steamboats, on the s,s
R fre apply the rul,t letters brought by steam
boats on other waters for instance from Galveston Brazo4
Mobile. COVington etc. >
With regard Mr. Penns postscript in these words
The 18th section Of the act of 1915 i what relied upon
and not section 10th OF 1925 II would merely remark
that il MIR Penn. who Postmaster Of N,y Orleans in
he would have been entitled not ONLY To
The thanks Of MIR Oakley but to those If the patrons OF
MS office and OF his humble successor in particular
pen perusal of the foregoing feel assured you will
b'rryt the error into which you have fallen. and will
promptly correct it
Very respectfully, your obedcnt servant