UNITED srnms v. Moons:. 39
Tarble Cases, but we found ourselves in the delicate, embarrassing,
and very unpleasant position of reaching a conclusion different from
that attained by the supreme court of the state inlthis case, for .
whose judgment we entertain the very highest respect. That tri-
bunal held, on a writ of habeas corpus heretofore issued on petition
of Robb,ithat the superior court had jurisdiction and authority to
compel petitioner, by imprisonment for contempt, to produce the body
of his prisoner, Bayley, and remanded him to suffer the punishment
adjudged by that court. In rc Robb, 1 Pac. Rep. 881. Had there been ‘
no decisions of the supreme court of the United States settling the
question, as we conceive there are, we certainly should have hesitated
long before declining to follow this ruling of the supreme court of the
state. But where that court differs from the supreme court of the
United States as to rights depending upon the statutes of the United ’
States, over which the latter court has finaljurisdiction, and we must
follow one or the other, as we must do in this case, our duty is to
yield obedience to the latter. As no reference is made to the Booth
and‘Tarblc Cases in the opinion of the supreme courtof the state, those ‘
cases may not have attracted the attention of the court.
The prisoner is entitled to be discharged from imprisonment, and
it is so ordered. ` . »
UNITED Sruns v. Moonn. i .
(Distric! Court, N. D. Illinois. November 20, 1883.)
Smmme Mauna Concmmme Lorranxms rnnouen rrrna: Msn.s—Dmcor Lmrmms.
The ofense of sending letters or circulars concerning lotteries through the
mails is complete under section 3894 of the Revised Statutes, although the cir-
culars in question are sent in reply to letters written by a detective, under a
fictitious name, for no other purpose than to obtain evidence of the commission
of the offense. '
Indictment under Section 3894, Rev. St. V
J. B. Lea-ke, U. S. Dist. Atty., for the prosecution.
A. S. Trudc, for defendant. ·
Bnooenrr, J., (charging jury.) The law under which this indict-
ment is found provides that no letter or circular concerning lotteries
shall be carried in the mails. The statute, as originally passed by
congress, provided that no letter or circular concerning illegal lotter-
ies should be·so carried. At that time a great many of the states in
the Union had prohibited lotteries within their jurisdiction, while in
others they were permitted; and difficulty arose in the administration
of this statute by reason of the contention that in some states lotter-
ies were still legal, and therefore not within the scope of this act. In
1876, congress, by an amendment of the statute, struck out the word
illegal, so that the statute, as amended, now reads,`that no letter or