Another important regulation contained in the Route Agents'

instructions, is that which forbids the admission within the mail car of any one except those officially connected with the Department. The strict enforcement of this rule is well for all concerned, and should be cheerfully acquiesced in by the railroad companies and the public at large.

Nor should its application in individual cases be construed, as has sometimes been done, into a distrust of the honor or honesty of the person refused admittance. It is done simply in pursuance of a wholesome and reasonable requirement, and with the view to confine responsibility to those upon whom it is placed by the Department, and to guard against hindrances to the faithful and accurate discharge of their duty.

The faithfulness of one of the Route Agents, in respect to a compliance with Instructions, was a few years since tested by the Post Master General in person, who happened to be travelling _incog._, so far as those on that train were concerned.

Just as the cars were about to leave one of the stations, JUDGE HALL, then Post Master General, presented himself at the door of the mail apartment, when the following conversation occurred:--

_Post Master General._--Good morning, sir; I would like a seat in your car to avoid the dust.

_Agent._--Well, I would like to accommodate you, but you see what my Instructions say, (at the same time pointing to the printed Circular posted up in the car, with the signature of "N. K. Hall" attached.)

_P. M. General._--Yes, that is all well enough, but Mr. Hall probably did not mean to exclude honorable gentlemen who would not interfere with the mails, or annoy you with conversation.

_Agent._--(Scanning the person of his unknown visitor pretty closely)--Suppose he didn't, what evidence have I that you are an honorable gentleman? Besides, I am a strict constructionist, and the order says no person is allowed here except those connected with the Department.

Judge Hall insisted upon staying, however, and deliberately took a seat in the only chair on the premises. Whereupon the Agent proceeded to call the baggage-master to a.s.sist in forcibly ejecting this persevering customer; and he certainly would have _gone out_, had he not without loss of time presented his card to the incensed Agent, just in time to prevent so ludicrous a denouement.

He was warmly commended for his faithfulness, and highly enjoyed the visit of his distinguished guest during the remainder of his stay.

CHAPTER x.x.xVI.

DECOY LETTERS.

Those who may have perused the preceding pages of this work, will require no further comment on the nature and utility of decoy letters.

But as some persons are met with who, without much reflection, condemn their use under all circ.u.mstances, it may be well to offer a few remarks in defence of this practice.

It is very clear that decoy letters can never injure honest men. These missives trouble no one who does not unlawfully meddle with them, and it can hardly be claimed that they offer any greater temptations to the dishonestly inclined than any other cla.s.s of money-letters. It is of course impossible for any one to distinguish between a decoy letter and a genuine one, and he who faithfully discharges his duties in reference to other letters, will never find out by his own personal experience, that there are such things as decoys.

It should not be forgotten that these devices are employed for the public good, and that the security of a vast amount of property, as well as the removal of unjust suspicion, often depends upon the detection of some delinquent post-office employe. In such a case, it would surely be foolishly fastidious to object to the adoption of a method of effecting the desired end, which accurately distinguishes between the innocent and the guilty, and which does injustice to no one.

In the defence of criminals tried in the United States Courts, for mail robbery, whose detection has been effected by means of decoy letters, especially in cases where there seems to be no other ground of defence, it is frequently insisted on very eloquently, that as the law of Congress on this subject provides against the embezzlement of letters "intended to be conveyed by post," no offence is committed by the purloining of decoys, inasmuch as this cla.s.s of epistles are not _bona fide_ letters, and are not intended to be conveyed in the mail, within the true intent and meaning of the statute.

This position has been overthrown, however, as often as it has been a.s.sumed, and it is believed that the decisions on this point, of all the United States Judges before whom the question has been raised, have been uniform throughout the country.

In a recent important trial in the city of New York, before his Honor JUDGE BETTS, the decoy system received a severe hetch.e.l.ling from the learned counsel for the prisoner, and after the evidence had been laid before the jury, the Court was asked to dismiss the case and the culprit, on the ground that the offence provided against in the twenty-first section of the Act of 1825, had not been committed.

But his Honor took a very different view of the matter, as will appear by the following extract from his decision:--

Judge Betts remarked to the jury that the facts upon which the indictment is found being uncontroverted, the question of the prisoner's guilt depends solely upon points of law.

When facts are ascertained, it is the province of the Court to determine whether they come within the provisions of the law sought to be applied to them; and, although in criminal cases the jury gives a general answer, covering both the law and fact, to the inquiry whether the accused is guilty or not guilty, it is not to be supposed they will, in a case resting wholly upon a question of law, render a verdict in opposition to the instructions of the Court. The defence of the accused a.s.sumes that the twenty-first section above recited, in order to a conviction under it, demands affirmative proof from the prosecution that the letters were _intended to be conveyed by post_, according to their address: And it is urged that such proof not being made, but on the contrary, the evidence being that the writer of the letters did not intend they should be so delivered, but meant to take them out of the mail himself, to prevent their delivery, if they were not embezzled in the office in this city, the acts done by the accused are no offence under the statute.

I think that construction of the statute cannot be maintained in respect to letters actually in the mail, and especially in this case, where the letters had been conveyed by post and came into this office by the mail from other offices.

It is a presumption of law, and not a matter of proof, that letters so circ.u.mstanced, were intended to be conveyed by post.

The question of intention is no longer referable to the private purpose of the writer, whatever might be the fact when letters are given to persons employed in the Post-Office Department, out of the office, for the purpose of being put into it or conveyed by mail.

When, however, a letter already in the mail is purloined, (1 McLean R. 504; 2 Id. 434,) or is embezzled by a carrier on the route, (1 Curtis R. 367,) it is, in judgment of law, intended to be conveyed by post, within the meaning of the statute, and the private purpose and intention of the person who put it in the mail, is in no way material, and need not be proved.

Nor indeed, if the accused can prove, or it is made to appear upon the evidence of the prosecution, that the letter was placed in the mail or came into a post-office, prepared and intended as a decoy, and was not intrusted to the mail in the way of bona fide correspondence, is the criminality of taking it thereby absolved: even if the evidence advances another stage, and shows that the decoy was aimed at and intended for the particular person caught by it, (_The United States_ v. _Laurence_, 2 McLean R. 441; _The United States_ v. _Foye_, 1 Curtis R. 307-8.)

These decisions enforce the manifest policy of the statute. The post-office establishment, and the enactments maintaining the security of its action and the fidelity of persons employed in it, compose a great national measure, and the laws governing and protecting it are to be construed so as to subserve the public good, and not with a view to what might be a reasonable rule in transactions between individuals. But I apprehend that even in individual transactions, the agents of a bank, a merchant's clerk, or a domestic servant could not protect themselves against a criminal or civil charge of appropriating the effects of their employers, by proof that the property had been placed within their reach by its owner, in distrust of their honesty, and for the purpose of testing it.

The method adopted by the Department to detect offenders under this law, does not appear to me objectionable in the point of view pressed by the counsel for the accused. No further temptation or facility to the commission of the offence is thereby placed before such offenders than must necessarily be presented in the daily business of their trusts. These packages were in every respect the same in appearance, and with only the same indications of enclosing money, as ordinary letters by which remittances are made. And it seems to me when it comes to be understood by persons handling such packages in the mail or destined for it, that a watchful eye may be following each package from office to office, and noticing everything done to it, that the apprehension of such supervision may act almost with the force of a religious consciousness of accountability, in awing wicked purposes and preventing criminal actions.

I am persuaded that letters would rarely be intercepted in their transmission by post, if every person concerned in mailing or carrying them, could be impressed with the idea that each package enclosing valuables, may be but a bait seeking to detect whoever may be dishonest enough to molest it, and to become a swift witness for his conviction and punishment.

The jury convicted the prisoner, and on the 29th day of December, 1854, he was sentenced to ten years' imprisonment.

SUPPLEMENTARY CHAPTER.

PRACTICAL INFORMATION.

The design of the author, in the preparation of the present volume, would be but imperfectly answered, were he to fail to communicate that practical information which it is very desirable that the public at large should possess, both for their own sake and that of those connected with the mail service. For, an accurate knowledge of the requirements of the law upon leading points, would obviate much of the disappointment and unpleasant feeling to which mistaken views on the subject give rise. There are popular errors on many matters connected with post-office regulations which are every day causing trouble and vexation, and which can only be corrected by presenting the facts as they are.

This information is not accessible to the public in general; at least, it is out of the way, and is not kept before the people. The Department publishes, at irregular intervals, an edition of its laws and regulations for the use of post masters, each of whom is supplied with a copy; and this, with the exception of the ordinary newspaper record of the laws as they are pa.s.sed, is the only source of information upon this subject open to people in general. The detail of regulations established by the Department, seldom finds its way into the papers, and correspondents are left to acquire their knowledge respecting it by (sometimes sad) experience.

It is the intention of the author to supply these deficiencies in part at least, avoiding, however, all laws and regulations likely to be changed by legislation, or the constructions put upon them by the chief officers appointed from time to time to administer those laws.

Post masters being already provided with the official instructions pertaining to their duties, a repet.i.tion here is deemed unnecessary farther than a knowledge of the laws and regulations may be essential to the public.

For the items of information presented below, the author relies in part on the suggestions of his own experience, but they are mainly compiled from the established regulations of the Post-Office Department, and such of the decisions of its chief officers as are likely to remain permanently in force:--

MISSING LETTERS, ETC.

That the loss or delay of letters, valuable or otherwise, is often caused by the dishonesty or carelessness of those to whose custody they are committed, must be acknowledged. Still, in a large proportion of such cases, the cause is to be found in some one or a combination of those curious omissions and mistakes to which all correspondents--but more especially men deeply involved in business pursuits--are so liable. The records of the Dead Letter Office, if consulted, would present a list of delinquents in this particular, embracing the names of hundreds of individuals and firms, ranking as the most exact and systematic persons in the community.

A similar examination of the official reports of the Special Agents and post masters, would further show to what an extent such losses are attributable to a want of fidelity and proper care on the part of persons employed to convey letters to and from the post-office. Suggestions as to the remedies are hardly called for.

So far as relates to misdirections, as they are most apt to occur with persons and mercantile houses of extensive correspondence, an excellent precaution may be found, in requiring the post-office messenger, after the letters have been prepared for the mail, to enter in a book kept for that purpose, the full outside address of each letter, with the date of mailing. In case any one of them is incorrectly addressed, and fails to reach its intended destination, a reference to the book of superscriptions will show where the missing doc.u.ment was sent, and lead to its immediate recovery. If correctly addressed, that fact would appear, and materially aid in an official investigation. This, together with the adoption of a greater degree of care than is at present exercised, in the selection of persons to act as private letter carriers, would greatly reduce the number of losses, mishaps, and complaints in connection with the mails. Where it is possible, but one person should be sent to the post-office.

The name of the writer or firm, written or printed on the letter, is an advantage in case of miscarriage.

When a valuable letter is missing from any cause, the fact should be at once reported to the post master, in writing, with full particulars, and a search made by the complainants, of the pockets of any spare over-coats about the premises.

Where letters are delivered by a public letter carrier, or penny post, a locked box or some other safe place of deposit for the letters thus left, should be provided. A neglect of this precaution, is the cause of many annoyances and losses.