[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
January 10, 1903


JAMA. 1903;XL(2):105. doi:10.1001/jama.1903.02490020037009

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


The abstract of the recent decision of the U. S. Supreme Court that appears on p. 122, and which we noticed editorially November 29, emphasizes the fact that in the case as presented to the court the averments of the complainant as regards the material facts were admitted in the demurrer, and that the court did not have presented to it the evidence of fraud which is so clear to us as physicians and which was the cause of the postmaster's action. That being the case, it may be that the decision is not criticisable by us, though we still think that some of it is liable to a rather unfortunate construction in some regards. It is hoped that nothing in the decision will rule out the proper presentation of the evidence when the case is reheard and a complete showing up of the fraudulent practice which lead to the

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview