Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1908-06-03

pupils, AID the assistant Attorney Gen
eral has delivered an opinion in the
negative. 10 says that under the law
of Minnesota, and also under the fed
eral law, the person to whom letter
is addressed, even If q minor, has
property and personal right In the let
ter, which cannot be set aside except
by action of court He adds, however,
that the legal control of parent over
a child may give him the right to de-
mand that the contents of q letter be
turned over to him, and may also
give the parent q right to punish
child for carrying on a correspondence
that has been forbidden. Whether this
opinion correctly interprets the law Of
Minnesota, it might take a Minnesota
lawyer to say. There is ground for the
belief that it does not correctly inter
pref the law of the United States. In
the case of minors supported by their
parents, the practice of the Post Of
flee Department is to ignore the direc-
lions Of minors and deliver their mail
to their parents if the parents so re-
quest A case which occurred in Mil
waukee not long ago is worthy of note.
1t involved the delivery of letters which
a girl in a travelling show was send
ing to a young fellow Of Is who had
made her acquaintance at a Milwaukee
theater. The young man was working
and partly self-supporting, and the let
tiers were addressed to him at his place
OF business. The parents found out
about the correspondence and request
ed that his mail should be delivered
to them. At first the authorities were
| in doubt, but after communication with
Washington it was decided to deliver
the young mans mail to his parents.
When no contention arises, the post
office authorities have done their duty
when they deliver mail to the place
| designated in the address. Incalculable
confusion would arise If every letter
had to be put by the carrier into the
hands Of the individual whose name is
on the envelope. That, Of course, is
out of the question. The hitch arises
when individuals request that the adj
| dress on their letters be ignored and
that their mail be held for delivery
to themselves in person. When adults
make this request it is generally OBJ
served Anthony Comstock, Of the So
ciety for the Suppression of Vice, could
| furnish powerful reasons why parents,
| guardians and teachers should not be
denied the first handling of correspond
ence addressed to minors in their
charge Parents have a moral right to
know the contents Of all the mail mat
ter which is sent to their children who
are minors depending upon them for
support More good than harm is like
| ly to come from the surveillance by
boarding school teachers of correspond
ence addressed to pupils In their
charge. Laying aside the larger moral
problems which this proposition in
wolves, let the enterprise Of essay bu.
reaus alone be considered. There are
concerns which seek to make money
by selling essays and valedictory adj
dresses that pupils may palm off in
school as their own compositions. 1t
is right that parents and teachers
should be able to block the business
of sinister enterprises of this sort. 1t
would be against the public good for
the Post Office Department to enforce
a rule which would rebound to the adj
vantage of scheming and unscrupulous
money-makers and which would thwart
the wholesome supervision of teachers,
guardians and parents.