|
THE
<br />1, view of fact that ther>ry
<br />laws protecting Cite matlr�
<br />of the Congress embrace
<br />necessary to insure the Safi,
<br />transit and prompt dclj 5i
<br />and mail matter and no"I
<br />mails under that exclusive '
<br />Congress but "mail" w
<br />such and so long as it rcrtsal„Q
<br />contemplation of law pro
<br />National Government. US,
<br />U.C.Mo.19S5, 137 FSupp,.�
<br />235 F.2d 930. certiorari dcril
<br />266. 352 US. 943, 1 LEd-2d.
<br />The power of Congress ova
<br />is not unlimited and is subjcc{4
<br />of Cot Rights• Securities and..]
<br />193nmission v. Tirnetruu, in939, 28 F,Supp, 34, s„
<br />!• Excluslveneas of power ;t+
<br />The power of the Congress
<br />Cite mail is exclusive and its rcgul
<br />the receipt, carriage and I, lima,
<br />cry of mail "to the person to wb,
<br />directed" is therefore suprerrse•,l
<br />Alaxwell, D,C.Mo•1955, 137 Fd
<br />affirmed 235 F,2d 930. eertiora
<br />77 S,Ct. 266. 352 U.S. 94l, I Llld,
<br />Only
<br />ed StatessonVc,en latcs mails
<br />124 NAV,2d 150. 253 Iowa 979.
<br />4. Delegation of power~
<br />Ste Moles o/ 1kci3ronl unjw
<br />o/ rhir ores,%
<br />y rQ S. State rcguitttion or control...
<br />&fly
<br />18 U S C.A. § 1161 Punishing oal
<br />Dual mailing or advertising by ubttcne nlatc(iaMA
<br />did not preempt
<br />rclMatnry• field, and state obscenity
<br />etc it) no way imposing a burdj4
<br />inferfcring with federal postal furled
<br />Was not rcpttt;nani to this clause ddq
<br />Ins 10 Congress power to cstsbll ,
<br />al(tces and post roads. Roth v, U
<br />It N.Y.1957. 77 S.Ct. 1304, !S4 U
<br />t LC 1498, rehearing
<br />►,C" 8, 355 U,S, 852. 2 LEd,2d
<br />This power. having been
<br />he federal government. Is
<br />power of the ycv,.ral stato
<br />ish any postal system, and less
<br />aw made a monopoly excjudd
<br />ate Individuals from estab
<br />Nino or postal systems to
<br />tales. Hoover V. Mcch;',
<br />597. 81 F. 472.
<br />W,S,A. 201.42 istnatnl.r so _�
<br />rrtx» .nrtliu,rer insurance
<br />At[- I POST OFFICES AND POST ROADS
<br />SeC.-A Cl. %
<br />1„I 1110 uucr(crc with use of mail, did
<br />n++t inol"bit such companies from using
<br />i1„• ,nails, did not interfere with Con.
<br />gees' exclusive power to dcterrnine what
<br />,hall be carried and what shall be ex.
<br />,laded in rnaiIs,r-and'ifid not violate this
<br />clause. Ministers Life 6r Cas. Union v.
<br />Ilaase, 1966. 141 N.W.2d 287. 30 Wis.2d
<br />339. appeal dismissed 87 S.Ct. 407, 385
<br />U.S. 105. 17 LEd,2d 301. rehearing de-
<br />nied 87 S.Ct. 739, 385 US. 1033, 17
<br />i..lid.2d 681.
<br />7. - Labor organizations
<br />The provisions of McKinney's N.Y.
<br />Civil Rights taw. §§ 41. 43. 45. forbid•
<br />ding labor organizations front denying
<br />membership therein because of race, col•
<br />or. or creed. as applied to railway postal
<br />clerks association, is not repugnant to
<br />provision of this clause conferring on
<br />Congress the authority over Postal mat•
<br />tcrs, and hence Is not unconstitutional as
<br />an attempt to regulate a federal instru.
<br />mentality since the taw does not impinge
<br />on Icdetal mail service or the (*ewer of
<br />rite government to conduct it. Railway
<br />Marl Assn v, Corsi. N.Y.1945. 65 S Ct.
<br />tAsI. 326 US. 66. 89I_Ed, 2072.
<br />R• Taxation
<br />tilatute providing for the taxatrnn of
<br />Intangibles was applicable to Ixlstal wv,
<br />Ings ccrtrficalcs and not unconsntuttonat
<br />` canttary to provision of this article
<br />%,sung in Congress power to borrow
<br />money oil ctetlit of the United States and
<br />to establish post offices, Lutz v, Arnold,
<br />1935. 193 ME $40. 20 ind. 480. petition
<br />Overruled 196 N.L 702. 208 Ind, 480,
<br />Motor vehicle tact. Imposed by Laws
<br />1923. c. 418, on motor trucks used in
<br />interstate comnser. r. does not violate
<br />this clause, givirtf Corylress power to es•
<br />tablish pest offices and post roads.
<br />Stale v, Oligncy, 1925, 202 N.W. 893. 162
<br />Minn. 302,
<br />itegistmion tax on automobiles devot•
<br />ed exclusively to transportation of mails
<br />is `old. Louweln v. Moody, Tex.Com,
<br />APP•1929, 12 S.W.2d 9t39, 1-y a power to organize, in eonnee•
<br />669
<br />0 12
<br />9. -_. T.onans
<br />If Postmauer Gencral, pursuant to and
<br />in exercise of authority vested in hint by
<br />Congressional enactment, contemplates
<br />erection of post office on proposed site,
<br />his authority •nmy. not be.4e94cLccj, by
<br />local ordinance, and'resort to local zon-
<br />ing board is unnecessary. Crivcllo v.
<br />Board of Adjustment of Borough of Mid-
<br />dlcscx. D.C.NJ.1960, 183 FSupp. 826.
<br />Refusal by city zoning board of appli.
<br />cation for use of lot as substation post
<br />office, which had been leased to United
<br />States for ten years, was not unconsiitu•
<br />tional as unlawful regulation of property
<br />of United States, since such property was
<br />not within exclusive jurisdiction of Unit-
<br />ed States. Mayor an,' City Council of
<br />Baltimore v, Linthi.um, 1936. 183 A.
<br />531. 170 Md. 245.
<br />6. - Drugs
<br />The operation of t►te mails was not
<br />affected by the New Mexico Controlled
<br />Substances Act, 1953 Comp, § 54-11-21.
<br />and this clause giving Congress the pow.
<br />er to establish post offices did not
<br />preempt New Mexico jurisdiction to pro•
<br />hrbit the distribution of controlled sub.
<br />.ranres by the mailing of the substance. 10. Acquisition of land for post offices
<br />.State v. McIforse, 1973. 517 P.2d 75. 85
<br />N.hi 753. Thr authority of the federal govern•
<br />rncnl to acquire properly necessary or
<br />suitable for post office is within the ex•
<br />press grant of power given by this provi•
<br />sion. U.S. v. C_crtain Parcels of Land in
<br />Town of Denton of Caroline County,
<br />D.C.Md,1939. 30 F. Supp, 372.
<br />The power expressly given to the Unit.
<br />ed States to cs:ablish post offices and
<br />carry on offensive and defensive war by
<br />general grant of power to do all which
<br />was necclwry And proper to effectuate
<br />those express Dowers gave the United
<br />States the power 10 exercise etnincni der
<br />main over tetritorial lands within the
<br />limits of the United Stales• and all lands
<br />"ceded lot lift scat of the government of
<br />the Unrtcd States, an,l (tit cstablrshnlcnt
<br />Of Ixsst offices, (oils, arscnaFs, and Diller
<br />ncrdhil barldrngs. US V. 458.95 Acres
<br />al d.a"d, It C 1'a. t9311. 22 F.Supp. 1017.
<br />It. Examination of (,tiers or parcels
<br />No law of Congress can Place to the
<br />Itan,fs of ,Illictals connected with the
<br />Ixlstal IN'vice any authority to invade
<br />the secrecy Of letters and such sealed
<br />Itackaxes in the mail; and all regulations
<br />adopted as to mail of this kind must be
<br />suboWinate 10 lite principle embodied in
<br />Amend. 4, fix pant Jackson. N,Y.1878,
<br />96 US. 724, 6 Otto, 724, 24 Ltd, 877.
<br />See, also, Blackham v, Gresham, C.C.N.
<br />Y,1893, 16 F. 609.
<br />IL Foreign mall
<br />Foreign trail Is so closely connected
<br />with a Proper system of Inland mall as
<br />111" the Power to organize and carry on
<br />a general post•offiec system would seem
<br />to inl 1
<br />
|