United States v. Simmons
District Court, D. Connecticut
This was au indictment in three counts, under the act of September 26, 1888 (25 Stat. 496), for depositing postal cards of an alleged nonmailable character in the mails.
Read the full summary
This was au indictment in three counts, under the act of September 26, 1888 (25 Stat. 496), for depositing postal cards of an alleged nonmailable character in the mails. The postal cards in question were each mailed at West Winsted, Conn., by the defendant, who was a collection attorney, to one C. H. Cables, who was a house carpenter, whose home was also at West Winsted, but who was employed at his trade, also, in the adjoining towns, wherever work offered, and were as follows, viz.: C. H. Cables, Esq., Southington, Conn.: Jan. 13, 1893. Why do I not hear from you? I see, plainly, I shall be…
1Opinion of the Court
After argument, the court, TOWNSEND, District Judge, held that the language used on the postals was not of such a “threatening character” as to be within the first paragraph of the statute as to *641such language, but that the expression in the latter postal card “I see * * * you do not intend to pay any attention to * * * your agreements,” was obviously intended to reflect upon the character and conduct of the person addressed, and was therefore within the last paragraph of the statute. The demurrer was therefore overruled.
2Cited by5 opinions
- Tollett v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1973
- Warren v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1910
- Slater v. TaylorCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1908
- United States v. HandlerDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1974
- Ray Allen Tollett v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1973