The evening times. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1895-1902, 1901-03-16
MAIL FOR PRISON INMATES
Letters Addressed TO Them Not TO
Be Opened by Keepers.
Recent Opinions on the Subject by
Assistant Attorney Generals Free
man and Observation-Disclosures Where
Communications May he Withheld.

man and Observation-Disclosures Where
Communications May Re Withheld.
There has been considerable discussion
as t. the right of the officers of prisons to
open letters sent by or addressed 10 in
mates under their charge liz jaiis. prisons.
or other refor-natory or penitentiary in
situations. In view Of this discussion, the
Postoffice Department HIS published re
cent opinions. given by Judge a Free
man. and Gen. Edwin E. Bryant, Assist
ant Attorneys General for the Postofice
Department. which indicate the position
taken by the Department on the question
Judge Freemau'S opinion is IL part as fol-
lows
There are but few questions fraught
with more difficulty than that involving
the right of prisoner TO the use Of the
mails 1t not only involves the question
of individual right. but frequently pre-
serts the not more important but more
intricate question OF the respective rights
and powers Of National and State Gov
ernments. i is certainly the policy of
the postofflce. 10 deliver To the party ad-
dressed CT his authorized agent. every
piece OF rnailable matter intrusted to its
care On the other hand. II viii readily
be seen that in many instances the en-
forceElent Of local or municipal law, and
The protection of society demands that
letters should not be 50 delivered To al
low prisoner confined in jail free and
Untrammelcd intercourse with the public
by means of sealed communications,
would afford him the means of easy es-
cape on the other hand, to subject
his correspondence to the inspection of
any one appointed FOR that purpose with
out his consent would, in many instances,
seriously embarrass his defence. Again,
it would seem that some regard ought TO
be had to the nature OF his confinement.
a rule that might be applied to the
case of a prisoner awaiting the eXecu-
ton of a sentence OF death would be
extremely harsh If applied to the case
OF one imprisoned in default of bail
awaiting indictment for "A mere misde-
meanor This question has been before
this office on two prior occasions The
first is the case raising the question OF
the validity of d rule adopted by the
prison authorities Of Baltimore, Nd. re-
curing the warden TO open and read all
letters addressed TO the prisoner under
his charge. After reviewing TO some eN-
tent the authorities bearing on the ques-
ton J arrived at the conclusion that the
warden. in executing this ordinance, Flo-
lated no Law: OF the United States. 1 am
satisfied upon more mature rejection
that whil,. under certain restrictions the
correctness Of this conclusion can be
maintained II Is. nevertheless. too
broadly stated. ana taken without quail
fhcation is calculated To mlslead-
a similar question was again fStiSel y
a complaint from one --. c"nhneu IN
the fSlchrnond, a. Jail that he was not
allowed To send or receive mail matter
without having the same inspected 10y IN
prison authorities. In the latter case
the prisoner was not under indictment
nor IS 1t stated that his mail was eA-
aniined under the authority or any gen
crel prison rules or ordinance held II
that case that il Was the d.'ty OF the
postmaster 70 deliver the mani addressed
10 the prisoner TO the person authorized
Ev him TO receive Il. To recohc44e Z
seeming conflict between the opinions re-
ferTed 70. ana to lay down what ! am
satisfied Is the true rule as eslabl4SLeL
by the courts and embodied IN the reSu-
lations Of the department, Is my present
IN the first place. it must be under
stood that while the custody, care trans
mission: and delivery Of mail matter IS a
fUECtion OF the National COY eFlI il, o pc
yOut the interference ana coI''i2. -
State or municipal government II -
equally true that the citizen IN al! ms
rIsaJS of life, liberty, and properly. IS
the subject of State or municipal govern
Tuent. This proposition Is subject 20 some
executions which are not applicable 10
this case and need not therefore, be
discussed. The State OF municipal gov
ernrnCnt may deprive him of life. liberty,
or Dr0Deyuy Among other rights OF
which il may deprive him Is that or US
ing the mails for any purpose among
other classes Of property OF which It may
deprive him is his property n letters adj
dressed TO him. II need not, % course be
said that all Of this must be done by cue
process Of law. The E,-Glcipal autnorl-
II my prescribe. among Other IS Tor
his confinement that he shall receive no
sealed communications frOra persons out
side Of The prison. and may direct that no
postal official or other person be allowed
TO deliver 10 him any such COmmunica-
ton All TINS the local authorities may
do as a means OF enforcing local law Be
SOud this. however. the local authorities
cannot go. Neither State nor local au-
United States in the matter Of the dcIiy-
cry OF mail matter The local authority
may 50 guard the prisoner as to prevent
him from receiving mail matter address
Cd 20 him, but IL cannot require the post
master TO deliver such matter to one Of
its OWE officers, nor 10 anyone not au-
ceive it An order. therefore. on the part
Of prison authorities directing the war
den TO take from the pOsJoffice rail mat
ter addressed 70 Il prisoner uader his
charge. and 10 open the same would be
IN violation of law. and would not au-
thOrize the Ostmaster TO deliver such
matter 10 the warden
I am not prepared to say, however,
that rule requiring the warden TO open
letters addressed 10 prisoners under his
charge, and directed to his care, IS in
violation Of law II is fair TO assume that
a party addressing q prisoner to the care
OF the warden, thereby agrees to submit
10 such prison rules as may be in force
touching the correspondence OF prisoners.
Where letters are addressed to prisoners
10 the care Of prison authorities il win,
Of course, be proper TO deliver them to
the warden. or other representatives of
such authorities in the absence of con-
trary instruction from the person ad-
dressed. But in all cases no matter what
may be the charge against the prisoner
or what the nature Of his confinement
letters arriving AT the Office directed to
him, should be- delivered only 10 his or
der Having been thus delivered, the care
of the Government over them cea Ses- And
thOrlties wil not suffer q prisoner to re-
CeIve his mail. aaEd the prisoner viii not
consent that such mail shall be delivered
TO the prison authorities. il may be de
nvered 10 party authorized by the pris-
Oner 10 receive it. or II no such person
shall have been designated, such matter
may be treated as uHdeIiVera BILE But in
no event should such matter be delivered
TO anyone contrary 10 the wish Of the per
son addressed
'ThtEe is no law which authorizes 4
warden 10 open q prisoners letters un-
Ger any cIrcuu1Sta uees. 1t Is the practice
founded the rules Of most prisons
adopted as Il matter Of precautiOn TO pre-
vent the escape of prisoners 1t is never
theless 4 very delicate trust and should
be exercised with such care as to pre-
vent the disclosure Of any confidential
communications passing between .he rris-
nnunieations as might jeopardize the pris-
On discipline. Such communication ought
# possible. to be opened IL the presence
OF the prisoner addressed To allow them