St. Paul daily globe., 1891-06-29

accountable. The proprietor of a
newspaper who fails, perhaps. through
the death of witnesses or through some
other accident, to establish the truth of
charges made in the interest of the pub
lie. from good motives and for juStif-
able ends, is none the less mulcted in
damages. but your postmaster, no in
deed. He can libel anybody from any
motive or for any end, and when he is
called TO account, he is sure TO have
"evidence satisfactory to himself"
Again, the provisions of the statute
are not restricted to the mailing of lot
terry tickets, remit.ances OF letters of
inquiry: they cover a much wider cate
cory of any scheme" in fact, or de
vice for obtaining money of any kind
through the mails, by means of false or
| fraudulent pretenSeS or promises" is
| equally prohibited aud all the subter-
| fnges and devices of the statute are
| equally applicable in this as in the case
cf the Lottery.
Now, at first blush, there seems to be
i! well meaning provision. Lottery
companies are not necessarily fraudu-
| lent. whereas all such schemes" sucn
as described in the section undoubtedly
are-but who is to be the Judge of
whether or not they are fraudulent?
| The court and jury? Not bit of it.
The postmaster. again. He can put his
little stamp Oh the pr nted envelope of
an insurance company or bank if he is
not satisfied with the ''preteuses or
promises" upon which they are doing
business. But he won't. Why not?
| He has the power. What guarantee
| have we that he will not abuse it?
PoStmasters are not always Obliging
or just. Newspapers have found that
out to their cost long ago. But to what
| proportions will the petty eXactiOnS OF
consequential officials and their EN-
ployes rise when these added powers
are in full operation?
Suppose the caSe-every newspaper
| man knows how possible such case is
of the business manager of news
paper who, in entire good faith, accepts
the advertisement Or prospectus of some
land Improvement company, which
turns out. as matter of fact, to be
mythical. He is liable to arrest. But,
of course, he may succeed in proving his
good faith and the absence of any intent
to commit the crime. This we will con-
cede. Though why he should be put
to this inconvenience by the pOStoffice
department, we cannot imagine. But.
how about the edition of his paper in
which tine unfortunate advertisement
appears? 1t will not be delivered. 1t
may contain news OF the greatest i'm
portance to its subscribers, the Senti-
mentS of the greatest thinkers and NOR
allStS of the day, but because of this
one advertiSement-the true character
of which the publishers of the paper
could not possibly be expected TO know
any more than the public it was de-
signed to deceive-it is excluded from
the mails.
However, if one class of advertise
mentS is to be excluded, why not any
other? Could not, indeed will not, the
law be extended to take in medical ad-
vertisements, those of wine and liquor
houses, in fact all advertisements of
any character except those of church or
lodge meetings? 1t is easy to see that
the tendency of such legislation is to
seriously aUridge the liberty of the
press, besides depriving it of its legiti-
mate revenues without due process of
law.
The mail service, we repeat, is the
exclusive franchise of the general gov
ernment, and yet it is to be admins
tered under these restrictions and con-
ditions. What, then, becomes of the
liberty of the press? Evidently the men
who framed this bill thought little or
cared less about the liberty of press
in the habit of criticislng their acts.
But the public have all interest in the
press, and newspaper men have right
to carry on their business without in
terference, except by the due process of
law. The constitution expressly de-
clares not only that this liberty shall
not be destroyed, but also that it shall
not be abridged.
And why is the liberty of the press
abridged? Simply to suppress lottery
company incorporated under the laws
of the State of Louisiana. These laws
have never been declared unconstitu-
tlonal. The right of the State of Lou
isiana to authorize or maintain lottery
company has never been questioned.
The Supreme Court of the State has in
fact declared that the question of the
extension of tue cOmpany's charter is
properly before the people, and no one
doubts but that this extension will be
ratified by as large vote as cast at the
last election for that purpose. The
State of Louisiana, its charities and its
works of improvement receive large
sums yearly from the revenue of the
Lottery, and it is absurd to say in this
land of raffles and church fairs that the
State of Louisiana has no moral right to
maintain lottery. Any number of
governments and states have approved
of lotteries, whether conducted for pri-
vate gain or for the public benefit. 1t
is rather late in the day to import such
new distinctions into the practical buSi-
ness OF carrying on government
Besides, who can tell where this pros
elytism through the POstoffice will stop.
Shall Maine impose her prohibition
laws upon wine-growing California?
Shall the Sunday laws of Connecticut
be saddled upon those states whose his
tory, the very character of their popu-
latlons, lead them to regard Sunday as
day to be differently observed? All
these questions are matters of opinion,
often of theological opinion. questions
which are at least open to debate, and
yet it might be sought, through the
POStOffice Department, to make them
the rule for all.
Nothing could be more monstrous.
nor, in the light of history, so absurd.
In 1886, law similar to the present one
was introduced in congress, forbidding
the delivery of seditious documents rel
alive to slavery. Senator, afterwards
President Buchanan. supported the
law; Daniel Webster opposed it. But
what were these seditiOus documents?
They were the criticisms of the aboli-
ti0niStS upon slavery as it then existed
in the Southern States.
pressions of public opinion was un-
doubtedly blow at the liberty of the
press. 1t failed of enactment. Does
any one doubt, if the same measure had
come up later, say in 1862. that what
would have been considered ''seditious
documents" would be reflections upon
the right of the North to deprive the
South OF their property in slaves with
out their consent and without compensa-
ton. Few now question that the aboli-
ton of slavery has been a blessing to
the country and was dictated by the
best sentiment of humanity. But how
was this sentiment aroused but through
the press? And how was it proposed to
nullifY this sentiment but by just such
means as we are now invoked to enforce
the opinions of dominant party, which.
| even if they do not vary with regard to
| this matter, are certain to do so with re-
gard to great many questions which