National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1881-05-31
Nefarious Conduct in the Postal Ser
vice,

|
| vice.
The right of the people to be secure in their per-
sons, houses papers, and effects against unreason-
able searches and seizures shall not be violated,
| and no warrants shall issue but upon probable
cause supported by oath or affirmation, and par
ticularly describing the place to be searched and
the persons or things 10 be seized.-Aricte " Of
amendments to the Constitution Of United AuteS
Any postmaster who shall unlawfully detan in
his office any letter or other mail matter the
posting (which is not prohibited by law, with in
tent to prevent the arrival and delivery of the
same 10 the person to whom it is addressed, shall
be punishable by fine of not more than five hun
| dred dollars, and by Imprisonment for not more
| than six months and he shall be forever there
after incapable of holding the Office postmaster
Section $500, Unded States Rerised Statutes.
| Any person employed in any department of the
postal service who shall unlawfuly detain. delay,
or open any letter, packet, bag, mail of letters
| intrusted 10 him. or which has come into his pos
session, and which was intended to be conveyed
| by mail, or carried or delivered by any mail
rier, mail messenger, route agent letter carrier
| other person employed in any department of the
postal service, forwarded through or delivered
from any post-ofice or branch poStofice established
| by authority Of the Postmaster General; or who
shall secrete, embezzle destroy any such letter.
packet bag mail of letters although it does not
money or other thing of value. shall be punishable
by afiue of not more than five hundred dollars orby
| Imprisonment for not more than one year, both
| Sc :Sgl IBID
Any person who shall take any letter postal
card, or packet, although IL does not contain any
article Of value evidence thereof out of post
Office or branch post t-otce or from letter or mail
carrier. or which has been in any poSt-office or
branch post-ofice, in the custody of any letter
maiI-carrier before it has been delivered TO the
person 70 whom 1t was directed, with design 10
Obstructive correspondence or topry into the busi
ness or secrets of another, or shall secrete. en-
bezzle. destroy the same. shall. for every such
Offense. be punishable by a tine of not more than
five hundred dollars, or by imprisonment al hard
labor for not more than one year or by both.-!Sec
1892 Did
Obscene matter, indecent postal-cards,
and lottery circulars and letters are for
bidden the mails, and may lawfully be
detained. All other matter is protected
from delay or seizure by the foregoing
sections.
We have quoted the foregoing extracts
from the Constitution and laws in order
to emphasize a most remarkable state
ment which we find in letter from Den
yer, Col, signed ]. S. P, dated the 10th
instant, and addressed to the Sunday
Capital. We quote:
About the time this settlement was made the
postmaster here received telegraphic order from
Washington, purporting to be signed by the Post
master General and directing him 10 and for
l0ord 20 lhe Department al letters fG, addressed to
certain of the parties involved in the controversy
The postmaster consulted counsel, who |
advised him that he would be guilty of a |
public crime if he obeyed the order. The |
letter-writer thinks statement of the |
case was forwarded to member of the |
Cabinet with request that it be laid be- |
fore the President.
The Capital makes the following state |
ment in commenting upon this proceed |
ing:
Upon receipt OF the above letter we Immediately |
undertook to find out whether the forwarded pa |
pers had been received here and, if so. what dis
position had been made ofthem. AS may be imag- |
incd, we encountered good deal of reticence on |
all hands. We succeeded in ascertainng, how
ever, that the papers had reached Washington.
and that at Cabinet meeting the Presidents at
tention had been called to them. We also learned |
that considerable discussion followed. Our infor
nation is that when the subject was broached the |
GT6SlucllL asked the 1OSlinaSlef-OeneTdl II SuCn
an order had been issued by him, and if SO, upon
what construction of law he had based it.
That the Postmaster General denied having
issued the order, or having authorized any sub
ordinate to issue it in his name
That another member OF the Cabinet then sug
geSted the pTopriety of asking the manager Of the
telegraph company for the original message. in
order that the identity of the sender might be dis
covered.
That the Postmaster General requested that no
such steps be taken, but that the whole affair be
left in his hands TO manage
And that, after some more conversation. the re-
quest OF the Postmaster General was agreed to.
1t is said moreover. that in the course of the dis
cussion Reformer MacVeagh chirned in with the
inquiry, Well, suppose the Postmaster General
had issued such an order, would it not be justified
by the fact that the contemplated seizure was de-
signed to put the Government in possession of i'm
portaut evidence in pending prosecution"
We have a theory OF our own, based upon in
formation from persons who were cognizant of the
telegram at the time it was sent, which is at Mr.
James's service According to our information,
Mr.. James, contrary to his custom. told the truth
when he denied having sent or authorized this re-
order; but that it was q happy thought
of Detective Woodward, who. without consulting
James. took the distinguished legal advice of Re
opinion to the legelity of the act contemplated.
issued the order III James's name.
1t is of the highest importance that
the public should be informed whether
the telegraphic order to the Denver post
master was authorized by any officer of
the Government If it had been obeyed
the postmaster would clearly have been
guilty of a crime, and the official upon
whose order he acted would also have
been guilty of crime. We are not in
Russia we are in the United States. The
President himself would he guilty
of crime if he delayed or opened a
letter which had been lawfully committed
to the mails for transmission to any
citizen. The Postmaster-Generalh has no
more right to possess himself of letter
from the mails than he has to kidnap or
murder the person sending it. If any
person has signed the name Of the Post
to such q telegraphic or
der as is referred to above he is forgcr,
and whoever abetted him in it is equally
guilty. IF there is no statute to punish as
a forgery such IN act it is a grievous fault
on the part of our lawmakers.
This is nc trifing affair. Who sent the :
order? Il was not to enable any private
person to secure the letters. Seize aud
forward 10 The Impairment all letters, &c"
Thus rms the arbitrary decree. No such
letters were afterward received at Denver, ,
and so tie postmaster there had no OPP
portunity to obey or refuse obedience.
The ugly and Infamous fact remains that
he was ordered by telegram having the !