Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1880-02-23
THE LOUISIANA LOTTERY CASE.
A Decision for the Postmaster Gen.
oral.

efdls
This morning In the Supreme Court of the
District, lin General Term,) Chief Justice Cartier
and Judges Wylie, Mac Arthur, Cox, Hagner
and James, the case of Dauphin agt the Post
master General-bill to enjoin the latter from
interfering with the mail matter addressed to
complainant, was decided, Judge Cox delivering
the opinion of the court sustaining the defend
ant. After reciting the facts in the case and the
order Of the Postmaster General, Judge Cox dis
cussed the rights and privileges Of citizens OF
the states under the Constitution, and said that
Congress has the right to establish post routes,
&C.. and it is a privilege not duty, for Con-
gress may decline to exercise that privilege
altogether. 1t was in their discretion to exclude
any class OF matter from the mails. 1t may be
said that there should be no distinction
made between citizens, but Congress had
granted the franking privilege to some, some,
exemption from payment of postage.
He referred to the New orleans slaughter
house cases as to the excuse OF police powers.
to regulate them, &c, then Congress has the
same power as to the Territories and the Dis
trict of Columbia. Congress had the power to
proper officers may refuse to give the usual
privileges to parties who are engaged in lot
teries &c. He then discussed the rights under
the Constitution, and asked how far do these
extend and the privileges granted by Congress
not OF right but of grace II Congress repealS
the act for the registration OF letters couldt be
said that they had not the power. The object
misuse. He cited the celebrated Garland case
in Missouri, and the case Of Anderson against
Baker, Maryland case: and in this case the
right sought to be established is not an inalen-
able one. He concludes that the act is cOnStf-
tutional; that the orders of the P. NJ: General
are In pursuance law, and should be dismissed.
DISSENTING OPINION.
Chief Justice Cartier said that with one OF his
brethren he was unable to agree. He concluded
that the order of the Postmaster General was
unjustifiable. 1t was immater1al whether the
postal authority takes root in the constitution
or grows through legislation. What is this or
der? That Dauphin should not have the prfvil
eges of the mail because he has been engaged
in fraud. He is not the only one, but he is
sought out from 40, ,000, ,000 There was only one
way to do 1t, and 1t was to try him, convict him
and disfranchise him. Now, what had been
done? The Attorney General had investigated
the case and found that he had been engaged In
equivocal work, as he had right to; but you
make a monstrosty of the administration of
justice when you stop there. If this order is to
ant, it is a stranger to the constitution. II 1t
mt ans that the whole mail of complainant
should be shut out, he had no hesitation In say
ing 1t was unconstitutional. The slaughter
house cases were extreme cases decided under
the sanitary clause. The Postmaster General
says fraudulent registered letters may be re-
turned under the statute, and read therefrom
the words of the statute and the punishment,
and he asked il Congress intended to tnf1ict an
other punishment on the man. They had made
distinction between man and matter, and he
asked why they should punish an inoffensive
letter, and you must bear in mind that the let
ter must not be looked into. The maker OF the
law never dreamed of sacrificing the entire mail
OF man but only those relating tn fraudulent
lottery. The statute was designated to affect
matter in the mails, and Congress had power
to say what matter should go in the mails, but
it was under the Constitution which provided
that there should be no discrimination as to the
rights of citizens. He was aware that the coun-
try was prosecuted by filth and lotteries In the
mails, and he would go as far as any to put it
down until he reached the line of conscience.
ANOTHER DISSENTING OPINION,
Judge James delivered a dissenting opinion
He claimed that the right to establish the mails
was constitutional one, and Congress had the
discretionary control over the system.
APPEAL TO THE U. S. SUPREME COURT.
Senator Carpenter noted for complainant an
appeal to the Supreme Court of the United
States and the appeal bond was fixed at $500.