Semi-weekly Louisianian. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1871-1872, 1872-02-25
In NEWSPAPERS-AN I'M.
P0RTANT DECISION.

1naC the lnclOSuro OF circulars O
hand-bills. whether designated b
} the name of ''Supplement" or moi
; in the mail edition OF a newspape,
: is in direct violation of the posta
} law, has at length been defnitel,
; settled by Judge Sherman, of tb,
q. S. District Court, at Cleveland
Ohio, in the case of the United
States rs. w. K. Brown, publishe,
of the Alliance (Ohio) Monitor. Thi.
decision is of such importance tc
publishers that we give it in full:
"The United States Us. w. K
BroDn.-This is a motion for a new
trial, on which the court is asked to
review the evidence on which a ver-
dict was rendered against the de-
PENDANT at the present term. The
defendant, the proprietor and pub
Usher of the Alliance Monitor, a
weekly paper published in Stark
county, was.indicted under the tbir-
tiesh section oflthe act.,of Congress
of March 3, 1925 (see Brightly's
Digest, page 218, section S5), for
enclosing in newspaper a printed
advertisement, purporting to be an
advertisement of the Opera House
Shoe Store by one o. W. Nash,
which he then delivered into the
post-ofice at Alliance, to be carried
by post to. Mount Vernon, free of
postage. The section of the act
above referred to provide as follows:
If any person shall enclose or con-
ceal letter or other thing, or any
memorandum in writing, in news
paper, pamphlet or magazine, or in
any package of newspapers, pam
phlets or magazines, or make any
or memorandum thereon,
which he shall have delivered into
any post-ofice or to any person for
hat purpose, in order that the same
nay be carried by post, free of let
;er postage, he shall forfeit the sum
If five dollars for every such Of
ence, etc.
''The facts as they appear show
hat an advertisement, or adverti-
ing hand-bill, of the shoe store of {
}. w. Nash, dealer in Alliance,
here the newspaper was published,
7as enclosed, as charged, in the s
dition published December l, 1870, q
nd SO mailed for distribution to all 7
ubscribers who received that paper
trough the mail, one of them being 6
'r a subscriber at Mount Vernon. 4
"The question raised in this case n
one of considerable Importance to d
lie publishers of newspapers, and a 4
Hing upon it has been desired by :,
ost-ofice Department, although in a
he case at the bar it is conceded G,
lat the defendant had no intention T;
violating any law, it having been
Re custom, to some extent, of pub t,
'hers of newspapers to send such a
rculars or advertisements through q,
e mail, supposing it was permits
Die under post-ofice regulations, Il
hich provide as follows: "Pub- s.
hers of newspapers may, without
them to extra postage,
Id within their regular issue sup
ement. But in all such cases the
ded matter must be a genuine
pplement or appendage to the m
wspaper in question, and of the T.
me essential character, conveying &C
telligence Of general interest. I'm &C
r this regulation it is undoubted- in
competent for publishers, as is by
'quently done in Eastern news ga
pers, and not unfrequently in our pc
me papers when a tax-list, or tn
1er voluminous advertising matter lis
to be published, to print and en- Oh
'se for distribution, by mail or ed
lerwise, regular supplements, con- VI
ming the advertising or other gen. by
Il matter crowded out of the re- lot
lar or usual columns. But a tn
circular or poster of the or
scription here in question, is not of
III supplement, although, as in SO
S case, it may be so called or en- va
ed by the publisher. 1t is not "a of
hume supplement Or appendage1 tul
the newspaper 1t does not meet fQ,