TaE PosrMAsrEn GENEnAL.--.afarti,
{"character_count": 1442, "word_count": 238, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9686999917030334], "ccnet_perplexity": [1307.5999755859375], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
TMK PQsT1aAsTER GEskRAL.--gagarking oss.NeHspaper. We are told that one of our merchants who i,as long been in the habit of sending newspapers te his customers afies having drawn pen around his advertisement, coHiinued .o doso notwithstanding the order ot the Postmaster General to iear of wrap. pers and prosecute every one who should make any mark ona newspaper seul by mail. A lev days ago the merchant received note from the District Attorney, Inviting him to call. The invitation was complied with, when the District Attorney produced several of these newspapers which had beea wrong- ially abstrac.ed from the mails by order of she Postmaster General. and inquired whether tlae saerchasi had made these malks or caus- ed them to be made. The merchant said yes, and the Attorney informed him tha, he had been ordered 10 commence prosecution for thus viplaiioa of Post Office orders The merchant addressed the Postmaster General, requesting tlial fnnctionary to inform him where the provisions o( law could be found which be was charged with having violated. The answer was dlscon,inuance of the suit. The Postmastcf Generals arbitrary orders were the sole foundation of the suit. Our impression IS, that suit against the Post sliaster General for orderiny the enselops Of the papers to be taken ofI, anu the papers withheld from their proper owners, would he likely to find not only law but public oplaisa to sustain iL--.E Y. Jour. Com.