{
  "id": 11275313,
  "name": "THE STATE v. W. M. BAGWELL et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Bagwell",
  "decision_date": "1890-09",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "859",
  "last_page": "860",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "107 N.C. 859"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "101 N. C., 702",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8651519
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/101/0702-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "86 N. C., 680",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11275403
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/86/0680-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "93 N. C., 571",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11274726
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/93/0571-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "92 N. C., 802",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11275277
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/92/0802-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 213,
    "char_count": 3582,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.569,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 9.17732279218733e-08,
      "percentile": 0.5091082530294238
    },
    "sha256": "1308c8610b420ef34afeda749d0bbe74320f582f9973a11a290af82f3e5ed12c",
    "simhash": "1:fb01895ba291a516",
    "word_count": 628
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:31:37.064200+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "THE STATE v. W. M. BAGWELL et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Davis, J.\nafter stating the facts: The following is the act under which the defendants are indicted: \u201cAny person who wilfully, and without authority, opens and reads, or causes to be opened or read,'a sealed letter or telegram, or publishes the whole or any portion of such letter or telegram, knowing it to have been opened or read without authority, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor,\u201d &c. Acts of 1889, ch. 41, \u00a72.\nThis indictment is for an offence created by statute, and it not only fails to follow the language of the statute, descriptive of the offence, but, by the most liberal construction, it cannot be made to charge that the defendants opened or read a \u201csealed letter or telegram,\u201d or that they \u201cpublished the whole or any portion of such letter or telegram knowing it to have been opened and read without authority,\u201d and these are necessary words, descriptive of the offence, without which the indictment fails to charge any offence under the statute. State v. Deal, 92 N. C., 802; State v. Hall, 93 N. C., 571; State v. Aldridge, 86 N. C., 680; State v. Watkins, 101 N. C., 702, and cases there cited.\nIt is insisted for the State that the letter was \u201creceived through the United States mail,\u201d and the material charge here was the unlawful publishing and making known its contents \"without authority.\nWe do not see how this can aid the indictment. The statute does not make it an offence to open, read and make public a letter received through the United States mail, but it must be a \u2018'sealed letter,\u201d and opened or read without authority, or published \u201cknowing it to have been opened or read without authority.\u201d This is not charged, and the indictment was properly quashed.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Davis, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "The Attorney General and Mr. R. H. Battle, for the State.",
      "Mr. W. M. Robbins, for the defendants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "THE STATE v. W. M. BAGWELL et al.\nUnlawful Opening and Publishing Letter \u2014 Indictment.\nIt is necessary to charge, in an indictment for a violation of section 2, ch. 41, Laws 1889, and to prove upon the trial, that the letter or telegram was \u201csealed,\u201d or that it was published with knowledge that it had been opened and read without authority.\nThis is an indictment charging the defendants with reading, publishing and making known the contents of a letter without authority, in violation of chapter 41, \u00a7 2, of the Acts of 1889, tried before Bynum, J., at the August Term, 1890, of the Superior Court of Iredell County.\nThe indictment charges that the defendants, on or about the 10th day of July, 1890, did \u201cunlawfully, wilfully, and without proper authority, take into their possession a certain letter written by Emma L. Rankin to S. C. Rankin on or about June 20th, 1890, which said letter was duly received by the said S. C. Rankin, through the United States mail, at the postoffice in Mooresville, N. C., on or about the 24th day of June, 1890,\u201d and that the said defendants \u201cdid, on or about the 12th day of July, 1890, unlawfully, wilfully, and without authority, read, publish and make known the contents, &c., of the said letter, against the form of the statute,\u201d &c.\nBefore the. jury was impaneled the defendants moved \u201cto quash the bill of indictment, upon the plea that the bill fails to charge an offence under the statute, and particularly for that it fails to describe the letter in question to have been 1 a sealed letter,\u2019 and fails to charge the alleged reading and publishing to have been done with knowledge that said letter had been opened without proper authority.\u201d\nAfter hearing the argument of counsel, his Honor quashed the indictment, and the State appealed.\nThe Attorney General and Mr. R. H. Battle, for the State.\nMr. W. M. Robbins, for the defendants."
  },
  "file_name": "0859-01",
  "first_page_order": 895,
  "last_page_order": 896
}