New Ulm weekly review. [volume] (New Ulm, Minn.) 1878-1892, 1891-08-05
BILL TO MUZZLE;.
What the San Francisco Examiner" Thinks
Of a Recently Enacted Law-Question
Of State Rights.
The United States Sepreme Court Will B,
Asked to Pass Upon the Constitution
ality Of the Neasure-A Care
full Review of the Matter.

The supreme court of the United States
will, during its fall term, hand down de-
cision in the case of George w. Dupre, one
OF the publishers of the New Orleans States,
a leading daily newspaper of that city,
which probably involves a greater number
ofimportant legal propositions than were
ever presented for the consideration of that
tribunal
The San Francisco Examiner regrets that
these questions should come up on what
many may carelessly view as side issue.
Mr.. Dupre, relying upon the urconstitu-
tonality of what is known as the lottery
act and having chosen to ignore its pro-
visions, for which he was duly-and. as he
thinks unlawfully-cailed to account is
now seeking the relief guaranteed by the
constitution in such a case.
10 Mr.. Dupre, therefore, it is not a side
ISSUE but all important. as indeed must be
such an issue to every citizen which in
wolves individual freedom, the rights of a
sovereign state and the liberty of the press.
The most cursory examination of the pro-
visions of this act. entitled IAN act to
amend certain sections of the Revised Stat
utes relating to lotteries and for other pur-
poses" demonstrates the appropriateness of
its title. It is an act "for other purposes"
and very many other purposes indeed
The avcwed object of the statute is to break
up the business OF the Louisiana State Lot
terry company, and if the trainers Of this
new and certainly unprecedented leg!sla-
ton had sought to do this directly, hon.
estly and fairly, there could not be any
reasonable objection to the character OF the
attempt. The worst that could have been
said of such legislation is that it was nuga-
tory. "You shan't run lottery" Uncle
Sam would cry, to which Louisiana would
not unnaturally reply, II SHALL" And here
the matter would rest until Louisiana was
ready, OF her own accord, to agree with her
sister states
For there is no principle of law better
established than that the general govern
ment has no power to declare any acts COM
mitted within the borders of a sovereign
state other than those which are committed
in direct contravention of the special pow
ers lodged by the constitution in the general
government.
1t is for the state exclusively to declare
what is lawful or unlawful in the way OF
lotteries just as it is its prero@ to es-
tablish high license or prohibition or to
enforce, as the case may be, Sunday law
The trainers of the statute knew this per-
fectly well, and they have attempted TO do by
inoirection what they have no right to do at
all. They have sought to lodge in the post
Office department, powers wholly superior
to the constitution, the law of the land and
the proper tribunals for its enforcement
But the statute goes even further; it ex-
pressly authorizes the pettiest postna ster,
nay, eggs him on, to commit acts which
would, without the protection OF the
statute, constitute offenses Of the grsvest
and most inexcusable character.
These acts he is not only encouraged, but
commanded to commit on all occasions
which may seem fit to his own good pleas
ure, 1t contcrs chief, therefore, upon this
mere sorter Of letters and deliverer of mails
more authority than that claimed by the
supreme court of his own state, the presi-
dent OF the United States and his entire cab
inet-always excepting, o: course. his SUI
perior, the postm aster general. It puts him
wholly outside the law, makes him totally
irresponsible even to his own conscience
and common sense, and, to cap the climax
of absurdities, places the liberty of the
press, without which our present form OF
government might rs we'll be abandoned,
completely at his mercy.
These propositions are startling, but true,
and, being true, they are worth the careful
attention of every citizen who observes the
signs Of the times. Fortunately it is not
conceivable that the supreme court will or
can give effect to them. However desirable
may be the end in view, it surely cannot be
worth attaining at the expense of liberty
and justice. Yet this IS, in exact terms, the
issue involved.
1t requires no special knowledge or legal
training to detect the vice of such legisla-
ton. Like ali arbitrary and despotic ell
actments. 1t puts might above right and
justities the unlawful means it is compelled
to employ by the conceived desirability of
the end it seeks to attain.
Take section 1884 of the statute: "Any
person violating the provisions Of this Sec
ton" (Which makes the mere mailing of a
letter. or. in fact, ais mail matter having
the renotest conn ection with the business
OF the lottery company a misdemeanor)
may be proceeded against by intormation
or !ndictment.'
This section hos at least one merritt
recognizes the forms OF laws. if, at the same
time, it does trample upon the constitution,
kind, a trial by jury with all the regular
incidents Of such trial. However it is
wholly unconstitutional, and, upon analy-
sis, absurd. The State OF Louisiana, and in
deed any individual or company, is de-
barred by law from maintaining 4 nj all
ment, not only common carrier, hut an
exclusive common carrier, declines to ac-
cept the mail matter OF one state because in
other states 1t is declared contraband. In
stead of being neutral in the matter, and per-
hitting the states to settle their own differ
ences, the government seeks to imprison or
terrorlze those who attempt to make it do
its plain duty, which is to do for all the
states land not for any chosen nun Der of
then>) what severally they cannot do so
well tor themselves, provide safe, speedy
and trustworthy service uninpaired by
such star chamber restrictions as those now
being enforced.
But if the denial of mail facilities to the
press and the public because of differences
otopinion with regard to new distinctions
in morality arising between the several
states be deprivation OF the rights of the
states as declared by the law and the con-
stitution, what shall we say of section 1929.
which authorizes the postmaster general
''upon evidence satisfactory to HIMSELF" we
quote and italicise the clause to instruct his
- ?