The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1883-06-30
OUR WASHINGTON LETTER.
From our Regular Correspon dent.l

1t is stated that Postmaster Gener-
al Gresham will shortly renew the
war on lottery swindles, which was
begun some years ago and subse-
quently abandoned. At least he has
said that he will look into the matter
and see what his power in the penis.
es amounts to. Washington is good
market for lottery tickets. The
monthly sales of the Louisiana Lot
terry Company here is estimated to
run up into the thousands, and the
trade has been considerably stimulat-
ed by the judicious distribution of a
few prizes. Department clerks and
government employees of various
grades are liberal and persistent pur-
chasers of these tickets, many of them
investing from So to SO monthly in
the drawings. 1t is singular how
they find encouragement to keep up
this drain upon their incomes, for of
the hundreds of thousands of dollars
thus thrown away but few hun
dreds have been returned in prizes
!, and these have not fallen to the most
I Regular and persistent investors. But
1 this like all other species of gambling,
when the hope of renewed gain is
held out, possesses a strange fascina-
ton for those who once tempt the
tickle Goddess, and however slender
the chances may really be each play
er in the game thinks that the wheel
must finally turn IN his direction
that luck will change at last-and so
he goes on getting in deeper and
deeper with every revolution, and
often squandering that which belongs
to creditors or to family and children.
Suppose, for instance, these govern
ment clerks were to deposit each
month in some good savings bank
the amount they send to the swind-
ling lottery companies, how much
better would be their chances of ultl-
mately possessing fortune! 1t is
certainly the duty of the government
to interfere in this matter and consti-
tute itself the guardian of its employ
ees since so many of them are incom-
petent to protect themselves. With
all the uncertainties of their positions
before them, few of them save dol
lar.
The Louisiana company has had
one and sometimes two agencies here
for the last FIVE or six years. Occa-
sionally the local authorities have ar
rested them and imposed a fine, but
these fines are readily paid and the
business goes on as before. This pow
erful and wealthy company has many
friends in the capital and attempts to
check it's oper ations have met with
powerful distractions at every step.
During President Hayes term it had
considerable litigation on its hands
here. and thereby secured great
amount of gratuitous but valuable
advertising. The Post Office Depart
ment first attacked the Common
wealth Distribution Company of
Louisville, KY, in October, 1879, by
directing postmasters not to deliver
the registered letters addressed to the
company or it's agents. The company
sued the department and was beaten.
1t then appealed. In November,
1879, the department forbade the pay-
ment of any money order or the de-
livery of any registered letter direct
ed to M. A. Dauphin, of the Louis
lana Lottery Company, in New Or
leans. The company filed bill of
complaint against the Postmaster
General, in the supreme court of this
District, attacked the constitutional
ty of the statute under which the or
der was made, and asked for an in
junction. The court affirmed the
constitutionality of the law and dis
missed the bill. In this case Senator
Carpenter, representatives E. John
Ellis and Casey Young, and the Hon.
T. ]. Barley, the Hoo. M. 1. South
ard and others, appeared as counsel
for the company, and Judge Cox de-
livered the opinion. The company
appealed and afterward scored vic
tory in the District supreme court in
banc. where the fact that the concern
had been recognized in the Louisiana
Senstitution was brought forward,
and it was held that it had not been
proven that the lottery was fraudu-
lent one. The law under which the
department acted provides for such
action against fraudulent lotteries"
When the company appealed to the
court in banc, the orders made by
Judge Key were suspended, so far as
they might affect companies having
authority of law from any State of
the Union to carry on business, such
authority being recognized as prima
facie evidence that the company is