El Paso daily herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1881-1901, 1897-09-21
POSTAL CARD LAW.
Late Ju diciaI Runlin.s Relative to Dunnine
Matter.

Matter
The Cunning postal card" question
is one that gets many people, perfectly
innocent, Einto all kinds OF trou BILE
with the postal authorities, who ever
lynX-eyed, spare no one when they dis
cover a transgression OF the law, says
the Minneapolis Tribune. Just what
constitutes a dunning postal card is the
troubling question. Many people will
not even send request for payments
of money due for fear that they may
be hauled up before United States
commissioner.
According to a decision of the
federal courts in 1889 the following
form of dunniug postal card was de-
clared mailable:
"Please call and settle account.
which is long past due and for which
our collector has called several times,
and oblige."
These two were declared unmail-
able:
"You owe us $3.50. We have called
several tins es for same. 1t not paid at
once we shall place with our law
agency for collection"
.'You owe us $3.50, long past due.
We have called several times for the
amount. If it is not paid at once we
shall place the same with our lawyer
The court In the memOranua argueu
the case thus:
"Section l of the act of Septe mber
26, 1888, provides that all matter, 9TH
erwise mallable by law, upon the en-
yelope or outside cover or wrapper oil
which, or any postal card upon which
any delineatiOns, epithets, terms or
| Ian guage of an indecent, lewd, lasclvl-
Gus, obscene, ibelous, scurrilous, de-
.hav- fsfa ar
calculated by the terms or manner or
style of display and Obvlously intended
to reflect ipjuriOusly upon the charac'
| ter or conduct of another, may be writ
| ten or printed, or otherwise impressed
or appar emit, are hereby declared non
malta BILE matter, and shall not be con-
viewed in the malls etc. If the postal
| cards in question are non-mallable 1t Is
because they contain language OF a
| threatening character within the
meaning of the law, or because they
contain Language calculated ;.;a anu
obviously intended to reflect injurious.
| " upon the character or conduct OF
the person to whom they were address
ed. 1t is clear that they fall within no
clause of the statute unless they are
within the clauses last referred to.
Two of the cards. as will be observed,
contain demand for the payment OF
the money alleged to be due, and a
| threat to place the demand in the
hands of q lawyer for collection il
not paid at once.
"The language employed in the post
al card described in the first count Is
not of q threatening character, and IN
my opinion, no jury would be warrant
ed in finding, in view of its contents,
tina: it was obviously intended by the
writer to reflect lnjuriOusly on the
character or conduct of the person ad'
dressed, or to ipjure or degrade him in
| the eyes of the public. IL Is true that
| it contains demand for the payment
of debt, and says that it is long past
due, and that a collector has called
several times: but it is cOuched in re.
| spectful terms and no intent is appar'
| ent to put it in such form as to attract
public notice or to make it offensive &c
the person addressed. Congress has
| not declared that postal cards shall no,
be used to make such demands, and a
construction of the act ought not to be
adopted that will unnecessarily restrict
| their use for business purposes. The
card in question can not be held to be
| non-mailable without being over-crlt
ical aud extremely puucsious in the
choice of language which men may
| lawfully use in their daily transactions
| The demurrer is accordingly sustained
as to the first count"
The postal authorities have since thi:
decision made their ruling the law Of
| tho 6onartment.