Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1881-06-28
Col. AleXauder,s Letters.
JUSTICE HELMICK HOLDS Mr. ANGER RESPONSIBLE
FOK THEIR wAONGFUL DELIVERY.

JUSTICE HELNICK HOLDS Mr. ANGER RESPONSIBLE
FOK THEIR waoHGFUL DELIVERY.
Justice Helmick at noon to day delivered his
cecision IN the case of Col Chas. il. Alexander
W. Postmaster Daniel B. Anger. The action
was brought 20 recover s43, the amount con-
talDed In two registered letters and dellve ed
On forged order to Arthur WISER messenger
Of Col. Alexander's, wnom i5 app ,ars nislopSo.
pIiated he money. After revie wing the tsstl-
mony taken at the hearing on the 18th inst,
The JUSTICE says: "rhe Testimony closed. 1 re-
quested the department 10 fiie with ue the
three orders for the registered letters which
request was complied with The irsI OF Ter Is
caIed March 29ih, 1881. and Is sigaei by the
plaintiff In coarse. bIid hand. Toe second Is
GATED April 4th. and tue third order April ,th,
1881. All three orders were on the .cS5 of
t theiI respective notices TIE td,rd notice that
there "a letter 10 the city post Office addressed
70 9. a. Alexander. is endOr ed on the 0iok as
loiloWs: Please deliver this registered letter
aooIessed 10 NE, to the bearer, c. NJ. Alex Az
Ger, signtd Arthur V!sser.' IL VIII be seen at
glance mat tie delivery o: this letter vas a
most glar1Dg oversight, for Arthur Wiser signs
the order REQUESTING thai Tie letter be deliv-
eIed 10 q. M. Alexander, Instead of C. NJ Alex
aGder signing the order to deliver the letter to
Arthur Wiser. The signature OF C. II. AieXan-
ger 10 the genuine order ana the signature 90
tbe fCTged CrGers have not the slightest re5em-
biahce. The signatures to the forged ord-rs
are very poor mutations. boy wltho IL any
e3lellence should haye discovered the forgery.
The clerk OF the department was guilty OF gross
careleS5DesS in delivering the two letters in
question 10 Arthur Vlsser."
r Proceeding, the jrstce said that he was OF the
opinion that the prior acts OF the plaintiff did
Lot constitute Wiser his general agent aud
mat the letters In question We're delivered to
Wiser without proper authority. After qnottag
the Postal Laws ana Regulations" esirdns
The delivery Of registered Gail MISTER. the lbs
tlce concluded by SdyfDg:-"The publication o.
tht sc Postal Laws aid Regulations is notice TO
all peTsoIs IS 10 the security they have In the
transI or To ton OF registered matter. and espe-
c'ally In its safe delivery after It has reached
It's Ges tlnation. l hold that these published
Postal LAWS and Regulattons,' not Oeing incon-
sisteIt with any laws OF Congress, are Jaw. and
that employees and postmast ers are accountable
for their violation. Ii A gives his check made
pay able to b. or his order, and this check is
presented at the bank with forged endorse
me Mt and the bank pays 1t, the law holds the
bank responsible. Now are not postmasters
similarly Liable for the delivery or registered
letters upon forged orders? In my opinion they
are. Aid If so, to whom are they liable? Most
certainly to the person Injured In the case
before me the defendant was the custodian of
the plaintiffs register letters, and the agent
OF the dt feAdaLt was, to say the least guilty OF
very gross careleS ness ia delivering the two
registered letters TO Arthur Wiser, In direct
violation OF the Postal Laws and Regulations
There must therefore be a liability TO the plail-
tiff 10 this case somewhere, and he must h ave
remedy that VIII enable him TO recover his
money wrongfully appropriated. In this case
must hold the defendant liable to the plaintiff.
and juOgme ut Is thel efOre rendered In favor OF
The plaintiff for the sum OF $40 and costs OF this
suit" The case will be appealed