42 7 FEDERAL REPORTER.
A refer to lotteries; they will speak for themselves, and you will have
them in the jury-room, so that you may see just what they are.
The testimony on the part of the government shows without dispute
, that, some time in January, 1882, the defendant gave an order in writ-
ing to the assistant postmaster of this city, authorizing the delivery of
7h1s registered mail matter to a Mr. Halsey, and the testimony on the
part of the government shows without dispute that his registered
mail, since that time, has been delivered to Mr. Halsey, and that the
three letters in question, postmarked at Virden, Collinsville, and Shiloh,
Illinois, were delivered to Halsey, and receipted for by him. The ques-
tion of fact for you to pass on is, "Does this connect the defendant
with the sending of these circulars and tickets ?" Are you satished,
beyond a reasonable doubt, that these letters written by McAfee and
Mooney, from Virden, Collinsville, and Shiloh, were registered letters,
andwere delivered in due course of mail to defendantls agent here
_ in this city, and that, in response to those letters, these letters con-
taining circulars and tickets were mailed, either by the defendant
— himself, or by his direction, and sent through the mail as addressed?
That is the question. Does the fact that these registered letters from
Holmes, Williams, and Moorey, which came into the hands of the
. agent, Halsey, and were responded toin the manner exhibited by the
proof, satisfy you, beyond a reasonable doubt, that defendant sent
through the mail the lottery tickets and circulars in evidence? If so,
you should find the defendant guilty; but if you are not satisfied by
T the testimony of the government, beyond areasonable doubt, that the ~
defendant did send these circulars, then he should have the benefit of
that doubt, and you should render your verdict accordingly.
See Bates v. U. S. 10 Fan. Rnr. 92, and note, 97. W
_ _ i Umrsn Srrvrss v. Kms. * V A
t - ° ° '(Distrfot Uourt,·D. Oregon, January 26, 1884.) " ` ri .
1[ Onsruucrme rmt Presses or rim' Msn;. A M- l A V   _
_ The defendant and others, discharged railway laborers, to the number of 150,
, assembled atfendleton, Oregon, and by threats of violence prevented the
daily rrainof the Oregon Railway do Navigation Company, including the mail
car with the United States mail therein, from proceeding to Portland, because
·‘ the conductor vvouldfnot permit them to ride thereon to Portland freeof charge,
on the ground that they had no money andthe company having P passed them
_ up," ought to "‘ pass them down; " and for the same reason and y the same
' means prevented the conductorfrom detaching said mail car from said train and
_ sending it to Portland"with·the United States mail tbeiein. · Held that, whether
, the company- was under any legal obligation to carry the defendant to Portland
‘ free of charge or not, he had no right ,10 prevent the conductor from 'sending
· ' the mail car ea to Portland,`as he did ;` an that-‘the conduct of the defendant
; and his associates being unlawful and necessarily causing the passage ofthe
mail to be obstructed, the law imputes to him an intention, whatever the pri·
· mary purpose of his conduct was, to cause such obstruction, and, therefore, he
- isguiltyof cbstructingjand retardingthe passage of the mail, contrary to sec- ·
tion 3995 of the Revised Statutes.
A