The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1894-01-22
WRITER'S OF DIRTY Letters.
Judge Hanfard's Decision Defining the
Law in Their Regard.

The full text of the decisions of Judge
Hanford in the cases Of ]. NJ. Warner and
George Jarvis. both indicted for the
alleged violation OF the Revised Statutes
prohibiting the sending OF obscene letters
through the mails. has been prepared and
they are given below. The decision In
Warmers case is as follows:
The question raised by the demurrer to
the indictment IN this case IS whether the
sending by mail IN a sealed envelope of
personal written communication from one
individual to another IS crime cognizaDie
inshis court7 The indictment is founded
upon section 3.sa3, II. s.. which as
amended by the act OF September d. 1855
Supp. r. =. III ed, 81. reads as follows:
Every obscene. lewd or lasciysoUs
book, pamphsef, picture. paper, lettsr.
writing, print or other publication of an
indecent character. whether
sealed as hrsi-class matter or not, are
hereby declared to be non-maiIabIe mat
ter. And every person vino shall
knowingly deposit, or cause TO be de-
posted for mailing or delivery, anything
declared by this section to be non-mail-
able. shall FOR each and every
offense be fined -
THE supreme court of the United States
in the case of the United States vs. Chase
i35 Z. s., %. gave an authoritative inter-
probation to tins law as il stood previous
To the amendatory act OF 1855, as follows:
In the statute under consideration { he
word writing" is used as one of group or
class of words-book, pamphlet picture
paper, writing, .rint--eacn OF VIII ich is
ordinarily and prirna tacie understood to
be a publication; and the enumeration
concludes with the general phrase" or other
publication. which applies to ali the arti-
cies enumerated, aud marks each with the
common quality indicated. Ii must, there
g. al II
construction. be a published writing
" hicn is contemplated oy the statute and
not private letter, on the outside of
which there is nothing out the name and
address OF the person 10 whom IL 10 writ
ten
cit is impossible TO follow the rule of
coDstru elton which the supreme court has
applied 10 this statute. and yet hold that
the word letter. interpoiated into il by
the amendment, IS not qualified by the
general phrase or other publication 1t
IS also naru 10 give the amendment any
effect and yet hold that mere private let
tiers OF an Indecent character are not with
IN the Inhibition of the statute. The
question is therefore perpiexiug / am
unable 10 agree with Judge Ross, who in
passing upon the same question in the
case of the United States vs.. Andrews. -
Fed. Rep, is reported as saying that Il, is
difficult to see how the intent of congress
TO exclude all letters of the character de-
nounced could have been made palmer
"TEe opinion of Judge Morrow in the
case of the United StNes VS.. Wilson, IS
Federal Reports, contains a careful review
OF the history of legislation and of the
authorities upon this subject, and for rea-
sons which TO me appear to be sufficient
he sustained demurrer to o similar i'll
dictment After elaboration | am in
doubt. / cannot say that the facts stated
bring the case clearly within the intent
aud letter of the statute. The courts of
the United States have no power TO punish
an act which Is merely wrongful, nor by
construction, TO Include within the penal
statutes offenses which are not plainly
specified.
Being conscious of having an actual
doubt IN this case, which | consider that a
reasonable mind may Justly entertain,
am constrained TO follow the decision of
Judge Morrow in United States VS.. VIII
son. The demurFeF IS therefore sustained
and the indictment Will be quashed.
"HAsFoRp, J."
In the case of Jarvis the cour, said:
This indictment for mailing letters of
an indecent character In sealed ENVELOPES,
upon the outside Of which scurriious cpl
thets were written, in violation OF the act
of September ~. Isss, / Supp. Il. =, 62I,
contains several eouats. each charging the
defendant with having sent by mali a pri-
vate sealed letter Of an indecent character.
in violation of the act of September 6,
1851, Supp. +. 5, - ed. Cpl. In this
case, as in the case OF the United States
against J. NJ. Warner, | hold that the
oifense is not indictable by reason of the
indecent matter contained In the letter.
The United states attorney claims, how
ever, that by an allegation 10 the effect
that. upon the envelope of each letter.
there vas written an ep1thet. to-wit: the
words The notorious. calculated and OBJ
vIousiy intended 90 reflect iDJuriously
uron the character OF the person adj
dressed, the case is brought within the
first section OF SAIL statute, which reads as
follows:
That ali matter otherwise mallable BY
iaw uuon the envelope or outside cover or
wrapper OF which, or any postal card upon
when any delsneatious, epIthets, terms or
language of an indecent, iesd. lascivlous
obscene iibeous scurriIous, defamstoTv
or threatening character, or calculated by
the terms or manner or style OF display
and obviously IN tended to reflect lnJurl-
ousIy upon tie character or conduct OF an
other may nc written or printed or other
wsse impressed or apparent. are hereby
declared non-Tn Al able matter. And any
person who shat knowingly deposit, or
cause 20 be deposited for mailing de-
livery. anything declared BY this section
10 be non n asisble matter. shall, for each
and every 0lenss. apon conviction thereof,
be aned Lot more thsa sSooo. or i'm
prisonsd AZ hsra iahor noz more than i've
Awarded Highest