united states ». dupf. 45 �United States v. Dxifp. �(Circuit Court, S. D. New York. January24, 1881.) �1. Pbactice — Notice to Pboduce Letter. �Notice to produce an original letter was served upon the defend- ant's attorney on the afternoon of the day before the trial, at 20 min- utes before 5 o'clock. Hdd, where the defendant's attorney had his office in the same town, and near the place of trial, that the notice was sufflcient. �2. Same— Same— ENVELOPœ. �The notice described the letter as enclosed in an envelope. HM, that the notice sufflciently indicated an intention to call for both the envelope and its enclosure. �3. LOTTERT CiBCULAH— DePOSIT IN MaIL — EVIDENCE. �Upon the trial of defendant for having deposited a lottery circular in the mail, in reply to a letter addressed to John Dufl: & Oc, it was proved (1) that defendant was accustomed to use the name of John DufiE&Co.,and sold lottery tickets under that name; (2) that de- fendant personally received the letter which contained the order for the circular in question, and also money to pay for two lottery tick- ets ; and (3) that the circular was addressed to a fictitious name, known only to the defendant and the sender of the order. Udd, under these facts, that it was competent for the jury to iafer that the defendant deposited the circular. �4. Bame- Addkbssed to Fictitious Name — Rev. 8t. { 3893. �A letter containing a lottery circular, addressed to a fictitious name,, was deposited in the mail. Edd, that such letter was within the scope of section 3898 of the Revised Statutes, relating to the mailing of letters or circulars concerning lott^eries. �5. Same— Delivert to Fedehal Officer. �HM,further, that it did not make any difference in the act done by the defendant that the person to whom the letter was delivered was an offlcer of the United States. ■6. Same— JuBOB— Talk About Lotteby Business. �A juror who sat upon the trial of the defendant heard some general talk in the corridor of the court-house, before he was empanelled, about the wickedness of those engaged in the lottery business. Hdd, upon motion for a new trial) that he was not thereby disqualified. 7. WiTNBSs — Occupation — CBEDiBiiiiTT. �The occupation of a person may-always be shown as bearing upon the question of his credibility as a witness. — [Ed. �Indictment. Motion for New Trial. Benedict, D. J. The defendant was tried and convicted of having deposited in the mail a lottery circular. He now ��� �
