IMPROPER INTERFERENCE.
A letter was once sent from the Dead Letter Office at Washington, containing rail road scrip to a considerable amount. The letter had been mailed in a Southern town, and miscarried, and it was returned to the post master of that town for delivery to the writer. It so happened that the writer of the epistle had failed in business, and on the arrival of the letter the post master informed one of his creditors, and an attachment was laid on the letter by the Sheriff.
The writer reported the case to the Department, when a peremptory order was sent requiring the post master to return the letter at once to the Dead Letter Office at Washington. It was sent, and the return mail brought the post master's dismissal from office and the appointment of his successor.
The post-office was worth $1200 a year, and the discharged post master had abundance of time to count up the profits that might have been made by acting up to the good old rule. "Let every man mind his own business."
THE DEAD LETTER.
The following is contributed by "Dave," of the Columbus (Ohio) post-office.
During my term of service at the General Delivery of this office, it was my custom, upon receiving dead letters from Washington City, to make a list of the names of the persons to whom they were addressed, and stick it up in the lobby of the office, with a notice, "Call for Dead Letters."
One day an elaborate specimen of Erin's sons, whose brawny fist and broad shoulders seemed to denote a construction with an eye single to American rail roads, lounged into the office, and up to the board containing the aforesaid list. He looked at it a moment and burst into tears. I spoke to him through the window, and asked him what was the matter.
"Oh! Mr. Post Master, I see ye have a daid letther for me. I spect me sester in Ireland's daid, and it's not awake since I sint her a tin pound note to come to Ameriky wid—and kin ye tell me how long she's bin daid, Mr. Post Master?'
I asked him his name, found the "letther," and after a request from him to "rade it, sir, and rade it aisy if you plaze," opened it and told him not to cry; that his sister was not dead, but that it was a letter written by himself and directed toMichael Flaherty,Boston, Chicago."
And is Michael daid, Mr. Post Master?"
"No, I guess not," said I.
"Well, whoisdaid, sir?"
I explained to him that letters not taken from the office to which they were addressed within a certain time, were sent to what was called the Dead Letter Office at Washington City, and from thence, if containing anything valuable, to the persons who wrote them.
"God bliss ye for that, sir, but Michael lives in Chicaga."
I told him I would not dispute that, but Boston and Chicago were two distinct cities, and the letter was addressed to both, and that Boston being the first named, it had been retained there, and his friend had not received it.
"Sure and I thought Boston was in Chicaga! and that's what ye call a daid letther, is it? Faith and I thought it was Bridget and not the letther, was daid. Ye see, Mr. Post Master, Michael he writ home to the ould folks that he lived in Chicaga, that he had married a nice American lady, that she was a sea-cook on a stameboat, and that they called her a nager. So whin I started for Ameriky, the ould modder. Miehael's modder, she give me these illegant rings (the letter contained a pair of ear-rings,) to give Michael's wife for a prisint. When we landed at Boston, I wrote Michael the letther, tould him I was going to Columbus to live, put on the name—Michael Flaherty, Boston, Chicaga, and put it in the post,—and sure here it is, and Michael's sea-cook nagerniver got it. Bad luck to the ship that fetched me to Boston. Mr. Post Master."
After offering to "trate me for the trouble" he had caused me, he left, and ever after, when he mailed a letter he brought it to me to put on the address, "Because he didn't understand these daid letthers."
SHARP CORRESPONDENCE.
One of the Peter Funk "Gift-Enterprise" firms in a large city, sent a package of tickets to a post master in Maine, the postage upon which was fifteen cents unpaid. They got the following hard rap over the knuckles, from the indignant official:—
"I herewith return your tickets. You must be fools as well as knaves, to suppose that I will aid you in swindling my neighbors, andpay all the expenses myself."
"I herewith return your tickets. You must be fools as well as knaves, to suppose that I will aid you in swindling my neighbors, andpay all the expenses myself."
To which he in a few days received the annexed "settler:"—
Sir."We perhaps owe you an apology for sending the parcel postage unpaid.As we infer from the phraseology of your note, that you are willing to swindle your neighbors if we will pay all the expenses, please give us your lowest terms on which you will act as our agent.P. S. All communications shall be strictly confidential."
Sir.
"We perhaps owe you an apology for sending the parcel postage unpaid.
As we infer from the phraseology of your note, that you are willing to swindle your neighbors if we will pay all the expenses, please give us your lowest terms on which you will act as our agent.
P. S. All communications shall be strictly confidential."
This note was promptly returned, with the following endorsement across its face, by the post master:—
"It seems you are not only fools and knaves, but blackguards also. Ask my neighbors if they think I would "swindle" them either at my own expense or that of any one else."
"It seems you are not only fools and knaves, but blackguards also. Ask my neighbors if they think I would "swindle" them either at my own expense or that of any one else."
To which this answer came back by next mail:—
"Wehaveinquired of your neighbors long ago, and that's the reason we applied to you in the first instance."
"Wehaveinquired of your neighbors long ago, and that's the reason we applied to you in the first instance."
Here follows the post master's final reply:—
"I acknowledge the corn. Send us your street and number, so thatI can call on you when I come to the city, and I may conclude to aid your "Enterprise."
"I acknowledge the corn. Send us your street and number, so thatI can call on you when I come to the city, and I may conclude to aid your "Enterprise."
But that was the last thing that the "Gift" gentleman could think of doing. In fact, secrecy as to his locality, was quite essential in keeping out of the clutches of the Police.
THE IRISH HEART.
Many of the reading public will remember the sad accident which occurred in Hartford, Conn., in the year 1853, when by the bursting of a boiler connected with a car factory, several of the workmen were killed. Among the killed were two Irishmen, brothers, each of whom left a widow, with an infant child. These men had been industrious and faithful toward their employers, and kind in their own households, so that when they were taken away in such a sudden and shocking manner, their sorrowing widows felt a double stroke, in the loss of affectionate hearts, and in the deprivation of many of the comforts which the hand of affection had hitherto supplied. Their little ones, too, required much of their attention, and often seriously interfered with their efforts to provide for the daily wants of their desolate households.
About six months after the accident, the Hartford post master received from the Department at Washington a "dead letter," which had been written by these brothers to a female relative in Ireland, enclosing a draft for ten pounds sterling, to defray the expenses of her passage to America.
This anxiety on the part of these children of Erin who had come to this land of promise, to furnish their relatives and friends whom they had left behind, with the means of following them, is a striking manifestation of that ardent attachment to home and its circle of loved ones, which leads them to undergo every sacrifice in order to effect a reunion with those for whose presence they long with irrepressible desires, as they go about, "strangers in a strange land." They have oftenbeen known to submit to the severest privations for the sake of bringing over a sister, a brother, or some other relative, without whom the family circle would be incomplete. All this is but one aspect of the "Irish heart," whose warmth of affection and generous impulses should put to shame many, who without their ardent unselfishness, coolly laugh at the blunders andmal aproposspeeches of its possessors, and attribute that to shallowness, which is in truth but a sudden and sometimes conflicting flow of ideas. As the mad poet McDonald Clark once wrote in an epigram on an editor who had accused him of possessing "zigzag brains,"
"By their works ye shall know them." It is comparatively easy to utter the language of affection, and to express a vast deal of fine sentiment; and much of this spurious coin is current in the world. But when one is seen denying himself almost the necessaries of life, in order to accumulate a little fund for the benefit of some one near to his heart, though far away, we feel that there can be no deception here. Like the widow's mite, it has the ring of pure gold.
The letter referred to, (which was sent back from Ireland in consequence of some misdirection,) was full of kind feeling, and manifested on the part of the writers a firm and simple trust in the goodness of Providence. The post master sent word to the widows that this letter was in his possession, and accordingly was visited by the bereaved women, whose tears flowed fast as they gazed upon the record which recalled so vividly the kindnesses of their departed husbands. The little sum enclosed, as they stated, was the result of the united efforts of the two families, who cheerfully joined in this labor of love. How many a recollection of unmurmuring self-denial, with the hope that made it easy; how many a remembrance of brightanticipations of the happiness to be enjoyed, when the beloved one, for whose sake these efforts were made, should be received within their family circle; how many such things must have been brought to mind by the sight of the missive, so freighted with affection and memories of the past!
The post master informed the widows that by returning the draft to the office from which it was purchased, they might obtain the money on it; but they replied that since it had once been dedicated to an object sacred both to the departed and their survivors, it must go back to Ireland, and fulfil its mission.
So these poor stricken women, to whom ten pounds was a large sum, (even larger than when the letter was first sent,) and who much needed the comforts it would purchase, sent back the draft, and have since had the happiness of meeting their relative in America, and seeing the wishes of their husbands faithfully carried out.
This is but one of many constantly recurring instances of generosity and devotion which come to the knowledge of post masters; and while we have put on record some of the blunders of an impulsive people, our sense of justice as well as inclination, has prompted us to make public the foregoing incidents, so forcibly illustrating the warm attachments that grace theIrish Heart.
MY WIFE'S SISTER.
The most ridiculous errors and omissions sometimes occur on the part of persons applying to post masters for missing letters. The following amusing correspondence will illustrate this phase of post-office experience:—
New York, 29th Jan. 1855.Post Master New York.Dear Sir,A week ago last Monday, I mailed two letters, both having enclosures,but of no intrinsic value, directed to my wife's sister in New Haven, Conn., neither of which have ever reached their destination.Very respectfully yours.W. B. H——.
New York, 29th Jan. 1855.
Post Master New York.Dear Sir,A week ago last Monday, I mailed two letters, both having enclosures,but of no intrinsic value, directed to my wife's sister in New Haven, Conn., neither of which have ever reached their destination.Very respectfully yours.W. B. H——.
The above letter was forwarded to the post master of New Haven, after having been read by the New York post master. It was soon returned with the following pertinent inquiries:—
Post Office, New Haven, Conn., Feb. 1, 1855.Solus!?Well, that is a fix! What is that name? Is it Jonathan or Wm, B. Haskell, or Hershel? Who'd he marry? How many sisters did his wife have? What were their names? Who are their friends and relations in New Haven? Is the lady here on a visit? Or, like a careful matron, has she come here to educate her children? Egad, I don't know! My library is wofully deficient in genealogy, and I shall be obliged to "give it up." Who can tell me the name of "my wife's sister?"Yours truly.L. A. T——.
Post Office, New Haven, Conn., Feb. 1, 1855.
Solus!?Well, that is a fix! What is that name? Is it Jonathan or Wm, B. Haskell, or Hershel? Who'd he marry? How many sisters did his wife have? What were their names? Who are their friends and relations in New Haven? Is the lady here on a visit? Or, like a careful matron, has she come here to educate her children? Egad, I don't know! My library is wofully deficient in genealogy, and I shall be obliged to "give it up." Who can tell me the name of "my wife's sister?"Yours truly.L. A. T——.
The New Haven post master's letter was then sent to Mr. H., with the annexed note:—
Post Office, New York, Feb. 2, 1855.Mr. Wm. B. H——.Dear Sir,By direction of the post master, I forwarded your letter of inquiry to the post master at New Haven.He returns the letter to this office with a request that the name of your "wife's sister" may be given to him, as he has been unable to discover it, although possessed of a large library embracing many works of a genealogical character. The P. M. at New Haven is inclined to the belief that it will be difficult to find the letter sent to his office, unless the name of the party addressed is given to him. In this belief the P. M. at New York joins, and the two P. M.'s hold concurrent opinions on this subject.With all due apologies for the seemingly gross ignorance of the post masters in this matter,I am very respectfullyYour Obedient Servant,Wm. C——.Secretary.
Post Office, New York, Feb. 2, 1855.
Mr. Wm. B. H——.Dear Sir,By direction of the post master, I forwarded your letter of inquiry to the post master at New Haven.
He returns the letter to this office with a request that the name of your "wife's sister" may be given to him, as he has been unable to discover it, although possessed of a large library embracing many works of a genealogical character. The P. M. at New Haven is inclined to the belief that it will be difficult to find the letter sent to his office, unless the name of the party addressed is given to him. In this belief the P. M. at New York joins, and the two P. M.'s hold concurrent opinions on this subject.
With all due apologies for the seemingly gross ignorance of the post masters in this matter,I am very respectfullyYour Obedient Servant,Wm. C——.Secretary.
RESPONSIBILITY OF POST MASTERS.
Casessometimes occur of the loss of letters apparently by the carelessness of post masters or their clerks; and in view of such cases, an important question arises; namely, to what extent a post master is responsible for the consequences of such carelessness?
The subject is not free from difficulties. In many cases it would be hard to say what constitutes culpable carelessness.
It is common in country towns for persons to take from the post-office the mail matter of their neighbors, especially when they live at a distance from the office, as an act of accommodation to them; and many letters are thus safely delivered every day.
Now should a valuable letter in this way come into the possession of some dishonest person, and be retained by him, it would seem severe, if not unjust, to prosecute the post master for the loss; since in committing it unawares to improper hands, he did but act in accordance with ordinary usages, countenanced by the community.
It would undoubtedly be a safer way of doing business, to insist upon an order in every case where a letter is delivered to any other person than the one to whom it is addressed, or some one usually employed by him for this purpose. But the country post master who should rigidly insist upon this rule,would receive "more kicks than coppers" for his good intentions; and indeed, cases like the one supposed are few and far between.
In cities, also, something like the following might and does frequently happen. A person known to be in the employ of another, comes to the post-office, and says he is sent by his employer for his letters, and the clerk in attendance, believing his statement, gives them to him. He robs the letters and disappears. In this case, it hardly seems that the clerk was guilty of a culpable degree of negligence.
Here is another instance of the manner in which a letter may go to the wrong person, where the fault is not chargeable to post-office employés. In the list of advertised letters, one is found for John Smith. An individual calls for the letter, claiming to be the identical John, and receives it; but a day or two after the "Simon Pure" appears, and is indignant at learning that his letter has already been appropriated, or that the clerk knows nothing about it, having forgotten the circumstance. Of course the clerk, in such a case, might require the supposed John Smith to identify the letter as far as was possible, by mentioning the place from which he expected it; but many supposable circumstances might destroy the conclusiveness of this evidence of identity, such as the acquaintance of the false John with the real one, and his knowledge of the place whence he received most of his correspondence. Besides, the real claimant might not be able to tell where the letter was mailed, for his correspondent might have written from some other place than the one where he usually lived.
But it is needless to multiply instances. Those that we have mentioned, and many others which will readily occur to the reader, will suffice to show that the number of cases in which a post master can justifiably be prosecuted, is very limited by the nature of the circumstances.
On the other hand, a proper diligence requires of the post master not only the obvious precaution of securing reliable assistants, but a care in relation to the minutiæ of his officewhich shall prevent the mislaying of letters, by carelessnesswithin, or their abstraction by theft fromwithout. The boxes and delivery window should be so arranged as to render the interior of the boxes inaccessible to outsiders, and of course no one should be admitted within the enclosure, under any ordinary circumstances.
I am aware that these hints are unnecessary to the great body of post masters in this country; yet it can do no harm to mention such things, as it appears by the following report that post masters are sometimes held to answer before a court, for the want of diligence in discharging the duties of their office.
The suit was brought in 1849, by Moses Christy of Waterbury. Vermont, against Rufus C. Smith, post master at that place, for the loss of a letter containing fifty dollars, mailed at Salisbury, Mass., Nov. 23, 1849, by Moses True, Jr.
Moses True, Jr., testified that he carried the letter to the Salisbury post-office, and showed the money to the post master, who counted it, and it was then enclosed in the letter, and left with the post master, who testified that he mailed it in the ordinary way, and forwarded it to Waterbury by the usual course. The letter not being received by Christy, application was made for it to the post master, but nothing could be found of it. The post-bill, however, which accompanied it, was found in the Waterbury office.
It was shown that a son of Christy and one other person were in the habit of calling at the post-office for his letters; but they both swore that they did not remember receiving the letter in question, and that if it was taken out by either of them, it was, in the absence of Christy, laid upon his desk or placed in a private drawer.
It was further proved that the Waterbury office was kept in a room about sixteen feet square, divided in the centre by the boxes and a railing, which separated the part devoted to the office business, from the portion appropriated to the use of the public; that the boxes were so arranged that the box of Moses Christy could easily be reached through the "delivery;" andthat persons were frequently allowed to pass behind or near one end of the counter within the enclosure, to transact business with the post master.
There was no evidence to show that any persons, other than the office assistants, were permitted to go behind the railing at the time the letter in question arrived at the office.
It appeared that the post master employed several persons as assistants in the Summer and Autumn of 1849, but there was no evidence to show that any of these persons were regularly appointed and sworn. It further appeared by Christy's postage account, that one or two letters were charged to him on the 24th of November, 1849, and he produced four or five letters, which, by the ordinary course of the mails, would have been received on that day.
We here copy from "Vermont Reports," Vol. 8, p. 663:—
The defendant requested the Court to charge the jury as follows:—1. That the defendant does not in any manner stand as an insurer in relation to the business of his office, and is only held to ordinary diligence in the discharge of the duties of his office, and can only be made liable for losses occasioned by a want of such diligence, and that the burden of proof is upon the plaintiff, to establish the fact of the want of such diligence. 2. That in order to establish the fact of want of ordinary diligence, the plaintiff must show some particular act of negligence in relation to the letter in question, and that the loss was the direct consequence of the particular negligence proved. 3. That although there may have been official misconduct on the part of the defendant, yet unless it be shown that the plaintiff's loss was the result of such misconduct, he cannot recover. 4. That if the letter were by mistake delivered to the wrong person, stolen by a stranger, or embezzled by a clerk, the defendant is not liable, unless he has been negligent, and the loss was the direct consequence of his negligence. 5. That it is not sufficient, to entitle the plaintiff to recover, merely to show that a letter was received at the office, and that the person to whom it was directed has not received it. 6. That the post master is not liable for the negligence of his deputies, unless he is guilty of negligence in appointing wholly unsuitable persons. 7. That the defendant being a public officer, he would not be liable in an action of trover, unless, at the time the letter was called for, hehad the letter in his possession or control, and withheld it, or had actually appropriated the letter, or money, to his own use.The Court charged the jury in accordance with all the foregoing requests, except the second and sixth. In relation to the second request the Court charged the jury, that it was not necessary, in order to enable the plaintiff to recover, that he should show a particular act of negligence in relation to the letter in question; but that, if the plaintiff had shown a general want of common care and diligence on the part of the defendant, either in the construction of his places of deposit for letters, so that they were unsafe, or in the management of the post-office, in permitting persons to go behind the railing who had no legal right to go there, and had also satisfied them that the letter and money in question were lost in consequence of such negligence or misconduct of the defendant, then the defendant should be liable. In reference to the sixth request the Court charged the jury, that as there was no proof that any of the persons who were employed by defendant in the office had ever been appointed or sworn as assistants, they were to be regarded as mere clerks, or servants of the defendant, and that if, through negligence or want of common care and diligence on the part of such clerks or servants, the money and letters were lost, the defendant would be liable therefore.Verdict for plaintiff. Exceptions by defendant.The decision was sustained in the Supreme Court.
The defendant requested the Court to charge the jury as follows:—1. That the defendant does not in any manner stand as an insurer in relation to the business of his office, and is only held to ordinary diligence in the discharge of the duties of his office, and can only be made liable for losses occasioned by a want of such diligence, and that the burden of proof is upon the plaintiff, to establish the fact of the want of such diligence. 2. That in order to establish the fact of want of ordinary diligence, the plaintiff must show some particular act of negligence in relation to the letter in question, and that the loss was the direct consequence of the particular negligence proved. 3. That although there may have been official misconduct on the part of the defendant, yet unless it be shown that the plaintiff's loss was the result of such misconduct, he cannot recover. 4. That if the letter were by mistake delivered to the wrong person, stolen by a stranger, or embezzled by a clerk, the defendant is not liable, unless he has been negligent, and the loss was the direct consequence of his negligence. 5. That it is not sufficient, to entitle the plaintiff to recover, merely to show that a letter was received at the office, and that the person to whom it was directed has not received it. 6. That the post master is not liable for the negligence of his deputies, unless he is guilty of negligence in appointing wholly unsuitable persons. 7. That the defendant being a public officer, he would not be liable in an action of trover, unless, at the time the letter was called for, hehad the letter in his possession or control, and withheld it, or had actually appropriated the letter, or money, to his own use.
The Court charged the jury in accordance with all the foregoing requests, except the second and sixth. In relation to the second request the Court charged the jury, that it was not necessary, in order to enable the plaintiff to recover, that he should show a particular act of negligence in relation to the letter in question; but that, if the plaintiff had shown a general want of common care and diligence on the part of the defendant, either in the construction of his places of deposit for letters, so that they were unsafe, or in the management of the post-office, in permitting persons to go behind the railing who had no legal right to go there, and had also satisfied them that the letter and money in question were lost in consequence of such negligence or misconduct of the defendant, then the defendant should be liable. In reference to the sixth request the Court charged the jury, that as there was no proof that any of the persons who were employed by defendant in the office had ever been appointed or sworn as assistants, they were to be regarded as mere clerks, or servants of the defendant, and that if, through negligence or want of common care and diligence on the part of such clerks or servants, the money and letters were lost, the defendant would be liable therefore.
Verdict for plaintiff. Exceptions by defendant.
The decision was sustained in the Supreme Court.
If the report of the above case shall have the effect to render any class of post masters more careful of the custody of correspondence, and in the general management of their offices, the object of its insertion will have been answered.
OFFICIAL COURTESY, ETC.
Thepost-office clerk who fails to do his duty thoroughly, is like a light-house keeper, who now and then allows his light to go out, or become dim. Sometimes no harm may result; but it may be that the helmsman of some gallant ship laden with precious goods, and far more precious lives, seeing no light to direct him through the angry storm, steers blindly onward, and is wrecked upon the very spot whence the guiding star should have beamed.
Not only is it the duty of those connected with post-offices to exercise the utmost carefulness and exactness, in order that mail matter may promptly reach the persons for whom it is intended, but sometimes much caution and discretion are required from them, that letters may not fall into hands for which they were not designed.
There are other qualifications scarcely less desirable for post-office employés than exactness and caution. Patience and courtesy toward the various individuals constituting that public which it is the duty of these officials to serve, go very far in carrying out the idea of the post-office,—that of being a convenience to the community.
We have elsewhere shown that the life of a post-office clerk is not passed upon a bed of roses, and we would here call his attention to the truth that many annoyances must be expected by him in the course of his experience. The ignorance andconsequent pertinacity of those who apply for letters, frequently try his patience to the utmost.
A person, for instance, anxiously expecting a letter, and not understanding that the mail by which it would come arrives only once a day, inquires at the office half a dozen times on the same day, and it is not very wonderful that the clerk in attendance should give short answers to the persevering applicant, or even omit to search for the letter. Yet, even in a case like this, much allowance should be made for the possible circumstances of the person in question. He may be waiting for news from a sick child, or for some other information of the utmost importance to him, and it is surely hard enough to be disappointed in such expectations, without being obliged to suffer the additional pain of a harsh response.
Of course post-office clerks seldom know the peculiar circumstances of those who apply for letters; but the exercise of patience and mildness toward all, would be sure to spare the feelings of those who often rather need sympathy than rough words.
Many who carry on little correspondence, and therefore have little occasion to be informed respecting post-office matters in general, often make blunders which are very annoying; but it is to be remembered that those in charge of the post-office, were employed for this, (among other things which contribute to the perfection of this branch of public service,) namely, to bear with all classes of correspondents, and to maintain a uniform courtesy toward every one. This would render it possible for even the most timid to approach the "delivery window," without experiencing the sensation of looking into a lion's den, as has sometimes (but I trust seldom) been the case.
On the other hand, it is reasonable that those who avail themselves of the conveniences of the post-office, should take pains to inform themselves on those points which it is necessary they should know, in order to avoid giving inconvenience to themselves, and unnecessary trouble to those appointed to serve them.
The times of opening and closing mails, and similar matters, should be known, that the post-office may not bear the blame due to negligence outside its walls.
Cases now and then occur, similar to the following, which happened but a few years ago.
A letter came into the Windsor, Vermont, post-office, containing a draft on the Suffolk Bank for three hundred dollars, and directed "Johnson Clark, Windsor, Ct." The "Ct.," however, was written so indistinctly as to resemble "Vt.;" and as there was a person by the name of Johnson Clark (as we shall call him) in the latter place, the letter was handed to him.
When he looked at the post-mark, (that of a town some twenty or thirty miles distant,) he remarked, "I can't imagine who can have been writing to me from there," and after opening and reading it, he returned it to the post master, saying that it was not for him.
But his honesty was only of a transient nature, for he could not keep the money out of his thoughts, and he soon began to think that he had been rather hasty in returning the letter, when, for aught he knew, he could have retained its contents with impunity. For was not the letter directed to Johnson Clark? And may not one take possession of a letter directed to himself?
This course of thought and these queries were followed by the determination to recover the letter, and appropriate the contents.
Clark accordingly went to the post master the next day, and stated that he had heard, the evening before, of the death of a relative who had been living at the West, and who had left him a small legacy, namely, the sum contained in the letter. On the strength of these representations, the post master gave him the document, without, so far as appears, making any attempt to verify his statement. The inheritor of legacies proceeded forthwith to the Bank in the village, and obtained the money on the draft, endorsing it, as is customary. It onlyrequired his own name to be written, and where was the harm? thought he.
A few days after this, the person who had written the letter came to Windsor, Vt., having been informed by his correspondent at Windsor, Ct., that it had not reached him; and thinking it possible that it might have gone astray.
On his arrival at the former place, he soon ascertained that the Vermont Dromio had taken possession of his letter.
This worthy found that the name of Johnson Clark was not a spell potent enough to protect him in the enjoyment of his unrighteous gain. He was sent to the State Prison for two years.
In this instance, the post master was clearly guilty of carelessness in allowing Clark to obtain the letter on the pretext that he offered. As there was a well known town in Connecticut of the name of Windsor, prudence would have required a closer examination of the address, after the letter was returned by Clark. And the story by which Clark imposed upon him, was sufficiently lame in some particulars to have called for a closer investigation of its truth. If the post master had requested to be allowed to read that part of the letter which referred to the pretended legacy, a refusal on the part of Clark to permit it, would of course have created a strong suspicion that he was playing a dishonest game, and would have justified the post master in withholding the letter until further proof could be obtained as to the identity of Johnson Clark with the one for whom the epistle was designed.
Cases similar to the above are not unfrequent; and in all such instances, those who rely on a name identical with that of some other person, as a shield for attempted dishonesty, have found their defence fail them in the hour of need.
The matter seems too plain to need elucidation; yet not a few persons, equally compounded of folly and knavery, have actually supposed that the possession of a name like that of another man, would enable them to keep on the shady side of the law in making free with his purse also.
This accidental resemblance of name has often been used for dishonest purposes in other ways than the one just described.
Snooks manufactures a patent medicine which is beginning to obtain some celebrity, when some obscure Snooks starts up withhispill, or elixir. The innocent public, ready to swallow pills and stories bearing the name of Snooks, makes no distinction between the two personages; and the "original Jarley" is compelled to share his honors and emoluments with his upstart namesake. Trickery like this can seldom be reached by law, but the appropriator of the contents of a letter under circumstances like those above detailed, is dealt with like any other kind of robbery.
IMPORTANCE OF ACCURACY.
Aftergiving "outsiders" the share of blame which rightly belongs to them for the delay, miscarrying, and loss of valuable mail matter, a balance remains due to the post masters and post-office clerks.
We have elsewhere expressed our views respecting dishonesty in these officials, and shall consequently confine our present remarks principally to carelessness and other similar faults, which can hardly be called crimes, but which often produce effects as disastrous as those which are the result of evil intention. These faults, indeed, differ only in degree from what are termed crimes; for neglect of duty, is on a small scale, a species of dishonesty.
There is, perhaps, no situation in which a lack of promptness and accuracy in the transaction of business may be productive of so great evil, as in that of a post-office employé. Those engaged in ordinary branches of business have some idea of the relative consequence of the matters about which they are occupied from day to day. They can generally know what is the actual importance of any given transaction, so that, if they are disposed to be negligent, they may, if they choose, avoid incurring the guilt and blame which would follow unfaithfulness in great things.
But the post-office clerk seldom has the power of making such a discrimination. The letter which is carelessly left over today, may go to-morrow, but too late to save the credit of a tottering house, or to render the instructions it may contain, of any avail. In the rapid course of commercial transactions, what is wisdom one day, may be folly the next, and thus it not unfrequently happens that the best contrived plans may be ruined by the delay or non-arrival of a letter.
The following instance will illustrate this.
Before the passage of the late Postal Treaty with Great Britain, a clerk in one of our large cities was sent to the post-office to mail a letter, containing an order for goods on an English house. The clerk pocketed the twenty-four cents which he had been intrusted with for the purpose of pre-paying the letter; therefore agreeably to the postal arrangements then existing, it could not go by steamer, but was sent by a sailing vessel.
Consequently the order was delayed, and therefore was not executed as promptly as the firm sending it had expected; and when the goods arrived they had fallen in value to such an extent, that the firm in question incurred by the operation a loss estimated at at least ten thousand dollars.
Post Masters as Directories—Novel Applications—The Butter Business.
A Thievish Family—"Clarinda" in a City—Decoying with Cheese—Post Master's Response.
A Truant Husband—Woman's Instinct.
Editorsare supposed by many to be walking encyclopedias, with the record of the entire range of human knowledge inscribed on the tablets of their brains; and there are those who in like manner seem to consider post masters as living Directories, able at short notice to inform any one who chooses to ask, where Smith lives, and what business Jones is in, or what is the price of guano, (an inquiry actually made by letter, of a New York post master.)
In short, these Government officers are often called upon to serve the public in a sphere which Congress never contemplated in the various enactments it has passed respecting the duties of post masters, and the details of the postal system.
A few specimens of letters received by different post masters, may not be uninteresting, as illustrating this phase of post-office life.
Here is one from an individual desirous of entering into a mercantile transaction in the "botter" line, and receiving the post master's endorsement of some good "commish marchan" who could be interested in the business.
G—— ——, Pennsylvania, January 29, 1855.Postmaster will pleze to give this letter to a good Commish Marchanwhat he could pay for fresh botter everry weak if a man would cent a hundred up to 3 hundred paunts my intension is to go in sutch bisnis You will plese rite me back to this present time.Yours RespectfulJ. S.
G—— ——, Pennsylvania, January 29, 1855.
Postmaster will pleze to give this letter to a good Commish Marchanwhat he could pay for fresh botter everry weak if a man would cent a hundred up to 3 hundred paunts my intension is to go in sutch bisnis You will plese rite me back to this present time.Yours RespectfulJ. S.
If the "fresh botter" was "cent everryweak," as was proposed, it must undoubtedly have been very much sought after, as possessing the negative, but important merit of not beingstrong.
Our next specimen was received by the post master of one of the cities in Western New York, and is unique both as regards its object, and its orthography, or rather cacography, which appears like "fonotipy" run mad.
North S——, Nov. 19, 1854.Dear friend it is with plaisure that I take my pen in hand to inform you of a famly moveing from this place the wider stacy and her to girls they are poor and haf to work for their liveing clarinda is the girl that workes the most from home mr sam shirtleff says that she has worked for him and she stole pork and cheese and the pork hid between the bed blankets and they found it and weid it and thaught a rat had braught it there and the cheese she carid home with her they sent to ladies there a visiting and sent a peic of cheese with them and they got tea and had cheese uporn the table and they sliped a peice of the cheese in thir laps and compard it togather and it was the same cind it was a large inglich cheese that shirtleff bought she has also worked to mr alford blax and his brother the old batchlor his mother was old and generly done the niting she nit seventeen pare of socks and layed them up for her boys when she got old and coldent nit no more and they was all taken away by her to pare afterwords was found at the store and she sed that she had took them they owed her five dolars yet and they wont pay her till she delivers the socks and she dare not make no fuss for fear they will bring her out she worked to mr cringlands and she hooked a pare of white kid gloves and a hym book and a pocket handkerchief and the gloves she traded away to the store for a dress by giveing a pare of socks to boot and she worked to truman buts this sumer she had taken a pare of stockin which they found in her sunday bonet and they lost to shiling in money and then they discharged her bengman grene bought a set ofdishes and they lost to platters out of the set they lost sope and buter out of their sular she borrowed of mister spicer a silver pen which coast a dolar and after he was dead she denied haveing it and she told it herself that she sold it for half a dolar and a pennife and the pennife was fifty cents they borrowed a pale of wheat flour and when they carid it home and put to thirds rie The pepole most look out for them in the trincket line mr sir post master plese answer this as soon as you can and oblidge your friend much yours with respectDirect your leter silas stickney North S——, N. Y.
North S——, Nov. 19, 1854.
Dear friend it is with plaisure that I take my pen in hand to inform you of a famly moveing from this place the wider stacy and her to girls they are poor and haf to work for their liveing clarinda is the girl that workes the most from home mr sam shirtleff says that she has worked for him and she stole pork and cheese and the pork hid between the bed blankets and they found it and weid it and thaught a rat had braught it there and the cheese she carid home with her they sent to ladies there a visiting and sent a peic of cheese with them and they got tea and had cheese uporn the table and they sliped a peice of the cheese in thir laps and compard it togather and it was the same cind it was a large inglich cheese that shirtleff bought she has also worked to mr alford blax and his brother the old batchlor his mother was old and generly done the niting she nit seventeen pare of socks and layed them up for her boys when she got old and coldent nit no more and they was all taken away by her to pare afterwords was found at the store and she sed that she had took them they owed her five dolars yet and they wont pay her till she delivers the socks and she dare not make no fuss for fear they will bring her out she worked to mr cringlands and she hooked a pare of white kid gloves and a hym book and a pocket handkerchief and the gloves she traded away to the store for a dress by giveing a pare of socks to boot and she worked to truman buts this sumer she had taken a pare of stockin which they found in her sunday bonet and they lost to shiling in money and then they discharged her bengman grene bought a set ofdishes and they lost to platters out of the set they lost sope and buter out of their sular she borrowed of mister spicer a silver pen which coast a dolar and after he was dead she denied haveing it and she told it herself that she sold it for half a dolar and a pennife and the pennife was fifty cents they borrowed a pale of wheat flour and when they carid it home and put to thirds rie The pepole most look out for them in the trincket line mr sir post master plese answer this as soon as you can and oblidge your friend much yours with respectDirect your leter silas stickney North S——, N. Y.
The zeal of Silas, if he was actuated by no sinister motives—no spite toward "the wider stacy and her to girls," especially "clarinda," whose exploits form the burden of his complaints—this zeal is highly commendable, and united with it there is a fulness of specification in the catalogue of "clarinda's" misdemeanors which equals in richness and effect anything that even the fertile brain of Dickens could conceive.
The ingenious device of sending ladies to the suspected domicil under color of a friendly visit, but provided with a touchstone in the shape of "a peic of cheese," wherewith to detect the other piece supposed to have been purloined by some one of the thievish family, was worthy of a Vidocq; and the triumphant issue of the case, when their worthy Committee of Investigation "sliped a peic of cheese in their laps" and settled its identity with the "inglich cheese" which the victimized "shirtleff" had purchased, showed the power of genius, attaining great ends by the use of simple means.
This epistle developes a new ramification of the postal system. A post master entreated to act as a conservator of public morals; to exert all his powerful influence against "clarinda," who proved treacherous to "mr sam shirtleff" in the matter of pork and cheese; and abstracted from "mr alford blax and his brother the old batchlor, the seventeen pare of socks" that their mother had "nit" to comfort their nether extremities when she, by reason of the infirmities of age, "coldent nit;" and filched "sope and buter" out of "bengman grenes sular;" to say nothing of the "pare of stockin" which were secretedin her "sunday bonet," and "to shilling," the loss of which occasioned her discharge from the service of "truman buts."
Upon this unfortunate post master was thrown the charge of seeing that the city received no detriment from the demoralizing influence of Clarinda!
This gentleman, not willing to be outdone by his correspondent in his devotion to the public good, indited the following reply:—
B—— Post-Office, Dec. 13, 1854.Mr. Silas Stickney.Dear Sir:I am in receipt of yours of the 19th ult., and in reply would say that I cannot too highly commend your solicitude in behalf of good morals, and your discretion in selecting the post master of this place to carry out your benevolent designs toward its inhabitants. The corrupting influence of small villages upon large towns is a thing much to be lamented, and it grieves me to think that the unsophisticated inhabitants of this place are to be exposed to the machinations of the "widow stacy and her to girls." It will be, sir, like the Evil One entering the garden of Eden, where all was innocence and purity!If in the course of my official duties, I find it feasible to ward off impending danger from this immaculate town, be assured that I shall not fail to do so.Yours, &c.W. D——, P. M.
B—— Post-Office, Dec. 13, 1854.
Mr. Silas Stickney.Dear Sir:I am in receipt of yours of the 19th ult., and in reply would say that I cannot too highly commend your solicitude in behalf of good morals, and your discretion in selecting the post master of this place to carry out your benevolent designs toward its inhabitants. The corrupting influence of small villages upon large towns is a thing much to be lamented, and it grieves me to think that the unsophisticated inhabitants of this place are to be exposed to the machinations of the "widow stacy and her to girls." It will be, sir, like the Evil One entering the garden of Eden, where all was innocence and purity!
If in the course of my official duties, I find it feasible to ward off impending danger from this immaculate town, be assured that I shall not fail to do so.Yours, &c.W. D——, P. M.
But post masters are made confidants in graver matters than these. They are not unfrequently called upon by deserted wives to look up their truant husbands, and by desolate husbands to aid them in recovering frail partners, who have been unfaithful to their marriage vows, and have forsaken the "guides of their youth."
Letters of this description are principally from the more illiterate class of community; yet amid the crooked chirography and bad spelling, there sparkles so much tender affection, sometimes for the guilty one, sometimes for the innocent children, who are suffering from the unprincipled conduct of a parent, that these cases command the warmest sympathy ofthose whose aid is invoked, although the requests thus made relate to matters entirely out of their sphere, and consequently they are seldom able to afford much assistance to the parties in trouble.
I will here give an extract from this class of letters, as illustrating the above remarks. The following is from a letter received by the post master of a city in Ohio, from a woman who had been deserted by her husband five years previous. She requested the post master to read it to her husband, in case he should find him, so it is writtenatthe latter person. In the postscript, (which is generally supposed to contain the pith of female correspondence,) she says,—