ONlTBD STATES V. IIASOH.
UNITED STATES 'V. MASON.
(Uircuit O(j.urt, E. D. Virginia.
OF MAILS iN
inclosing the funds to pay for them, does not thereby commit An ofl:eDse against the United 8tates, the statuto (section 3894) being intended to prohibit the use of the mails only by lottery dealers, and others using the mails for purposes of deception.
AID OF LOTTERIES-REV. ST. § 3894-lNDIOTMENT. A citizen who mails a letter to a lottery dealer ordering lottery tIckets, And
Motion to Quash Indictment. Section 8894 is in these words:
"No letter or circular concerning lotteries, so-called gift concerts, or other similar enterprises, offering prizes, or concerning schemes devised and intended to deceive and defraud the public for the purpose of obtaining money under false pretenses, shall be carried in the mail. Any person who shall knOWingly deposit or send anything to be conveyed by mail in violation of this section shall be punishable by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars, nor less than one hundred dollars, with costs of prosecution."
Tbe defendant had written to a lottery dealer ordering tickets to be sent him for money already in the hands of the dealer. The indictment charged that he had unlawfully, knowingly, and wrongfully deposited in a post-office to be conveyed by mail, within the meaning of section 3894, a letter addressed to the dealer, and that said letter was concerning the Louisiana State Lottery, etc. The indictment set out the letter verbatim. Motion was made to quash, on the ground that the sending of a letter to a lottery dealer, ordering tickets in a lottery about to be drawn, was not an offense within the meaning of the statute. Edmund Waddill, U. S. Atty., for the United States. Charles U. Williams, for defendant. HUGHES, J. It is very plain that the broad, literal terms of this statute are to be restricted in some manner. It declares that the mailing of any letter concerning a lottery shall be punishable; so that a father writing his son, warning him against spending money upon tickets in any specified lotteries, would be indictable for a criminal offense. That cannot be the meaning of the statute. It must be construed, not accor(Ung to its literal terms, but with reference to the evil to which congress was addressing itself, and the remedy it intended to provide for the suppression of that evil. The phrase employed by congress is, "letter or circular concerning a lottery." The two terms are used synonymously as to the person mailing the things referred to. A letter is indited to a particular persoD; a circular is intended for a number of persons. Whoever was in the mind of congress as mailing the circular, was in its mind as mailing the letter. But it is only lottery dealers who send lottery circulars. It was only lottery dealers who were in the mind of congress as sending out letters concerning lotteries, and not the occasional and indi-
vidual buyer of lottery tickets. The statute was aimed at dealers; for it is incredible that if congress had intended to forbid the use of the mails to persons ordering lottery tickets from lottery dealers, it would not have done so in plain aud express words. The indictment must be quashed. The circuit judge concurs with me (though not sitting in this case) iu the opinion that this statute does not apply to persons ordering lottery tickets from lottery dealers through the mails.
(Cirouit Court, E. D. Virginia.
A lottery ticket is not a letter, in the meaning of the statute which forbids the mailing of " any letter or circular concerning lotteries," etc. A schedule setting out tl}e prizes offered in a lottery, printed on the back of all lottery tickets sent out for a particular drawing, is a circular, within the meaning of that statute.
OF MAILS FOR TRANSMn'TING LOTTERY TICKETS AND CmCULARs-fNFORMASTATUTES, 3894, CONSTRUED.
Information. Edmund Waddill, U. S. Atty., for the United States. Geo. W. Brent, for defendant. After the evidence was concluded, the court was asked to explain the law of the case to the jury, and the court said: HUGHES, J. Section 3894 forbids anyone from knowingly depositing in the mail any letter or circular concerning a lottery, gift concert, etc. The information in this case charges the defendant with being a lottery dealer, and as such depositing in the mail, to be conveyed, etc., in violation of the statute, a letter and circular concerning the .Little Havana Lottery, describing the two things inclosed. The evidence tends to show that the defendant was a lottery dealer, and deposited in the mail at Alexandria, Virginia, on the twentieth of February last, a sealed envelope, having on it a two-cent postage stamp, addressed to the witness, A. G. Simmell, at Washington City. This envelope, when opened by Simmell, on being received through the mail, is stated by him to have contained a blank piece of white paper with nothing on it, either in writing or print; but that, enfolded in this piece of paper were two lottery tickets in the Little Havana Lottery, certifying on their face that the respective holders would be entitled to half the prizes, respectively, drawn by them. These tickets are shown in evidence, and prove to be printed, and to have no manuscript writing on them. As to the matter on their face they are impressions from an engraved plate, and they wonld fall within the meaning of the term circular, if each one was not individualized by having stamped upon it the particular number which