From the beginning, Congress, in exerting its power under the
Constitution to establish post offices, has acted upon the
assumption that it is not bound by any hard and fast rule of
uniformity, and has always assumed the right to classify in its
broadest sense.
Congress always has given, and, subject only to the express
limitations of the Constitution, can give, special mail advantages
to favor the circulation of newspapers, and has also fixed the
general standard and imposed conditions upon which these privileges
can be obtained.
The provisions in § 2 of the Post Office Appropriation Act of
1912 regarding publications and conditions under which they can be
carried in the mail construed, and
held that:
Those provisions are intended simply to supplement existing
legislation relative to second-class mail matter, and not as an
exertion of legislative power to regulate the press, curtail its
freedom, or to deprive one not complying therewith of all right to
use the mail service.
A provision in a departmental appropriation act gives rise to
the inference that it concerns the general subject under control of
that Department.
A provision in a post office appropriation act referring to the
entering of mail matter refers to second-class mail, as that is the
only class to which the word "enter" can apply.
Requirements in the second paragraph of a statutory provision
held to apply to articles enumerated in the preceding
paragraph
Page 229 U. S. 289
when the words used cannot otherwise be reasonably construed,
and when it also appears that, as passed by the first enacting
chamber, the two paragraphs subsequently divided were embodied in
one paragraph.
A penalty of denial of the privileges of the mail for failure to
comply with requirements applicable only to second-class matter
does not amount to entire exclusion from use of the mail.
Requirements in regard to publications entitled to be entered as
second-class mail and sanctioned by the penalty of exclusion from
the privileges of such second-class are not to be construed as
independent regulation of such publications, but only as condition
precedent to retaining the privileges of second-class mail after
entry of the publication, and so
held as to the provision
that paid for matter in periodicals must be marked "advertisement"
under penalty of exclusion from the privileges of the mail.
Legislative history of a statute can be examined to enable the
Court to construe it.
The requirements in § 2 of the Post Office Appropriation Act of
1912 that certain specified information be presented to the
Postmaster General and that all paid for matter, editorial and
otherwise, be marked "advertisement" under penalty of exclusion
from the privileges of the mail
held not to be an
unconstitutional abridgment of the freedom of the press protected
by the First Amendment or a denial of due process of law under the
Fifth Amendment, or as denial of the use of the mail, but only a
requirement relating to second-class mail matter sanctioned by
exclusion from the privileges of the mail in that regard.
The facts, which involve the constitutionality and construction
of the provisions in the Post Office Appropriation Act of 1912 in
regard to privileges of second-class mail matter accorded to
magazines and other publications, are stated in the opinion.
Page 229 U. S. 296
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court.
The Post Office Appropriation Act of August 24, 1912, 37 Stat.
553, 554, c. 389, in § 2, contains the following:
"SEC. 2. . . . That it shall be the duty of the editor,
publisher, business manager, or owner of every newspaper, magazine,
periodical, or other publication, to file with the Postmaster
General and the postmaster at the office at which said publication
is entered, not later than the first day of April and the first day
of October of each year, on blanks furnished by the Post Office
Department, a sworn statement setting forth the names and post
office addresses of the editor and managing editor, publisher,
business managers, and owners, and, in addition, the stockholders,
if the publication be owned by a corporation, and also the names of
known bondholders, mortgagees, or other security holders, and also,
in the case of daily newspapers, there shall be included in such
statement the average of the number of copies of each issue of such
publication sold or distributed to paid subscribers during the
preceding six months:
Provided, That the provisions of
this paragraph shall not apply to religious, fraternal, temperance,
and scientific or other similar publications:
Provided,
further, That it shall not be necessary to include in such
statement the names of persons owning less than one percentum of
the total amount of stock, bonds, mortgages, or other securities. A
copy of such sworn statement shall be published in the second issue
of such newspaper, magazine, or other publication printed
Page 229 U. S. 297
next after the filing of such statement. Any such publication
shall be denied the privileges of the mail if it shall fail to
comply with the provisions of this paragraph within ten days after
notice by registered letter of such failure."
"That all editorial or other reading matter published in any
such newspaper, magazine, or periodical for the publication of
which money or other valuable consideration is paid, accepted, or
promised shall be plainly marked 'advertisement.' Any editor or
publisher printing editorial or other reading matter for which
compensation is paid, accepted, or promised without so marking the
same shall, upon conviction in any court having jurisdiction, be
fined not less than fifty dollars ($50) nor more than five hundred
dollars ($500)."
The two appellants, publishers of newspapers in the City of New
York, complaining that this legislation abridged the freedom of the
press protected by the First, and constituted a denial of the due
process of law guaranteed by the Fifth, Amendment to the
Constitution, filed their bills against designated officials of the
United States to prevent the enforcement of the provision in
question. The bills were dismissed for want of equity, and this
appeal was taken directly to this Court because of the rights
asserted under the Constitution. Coming to define the controversy
in order to appreciate and restrict the issues, to the end that we
may pass on none but the questions which are necessary to be
decided, it is to be observed that there are some differences in
the mode in which the cases are stated in the pleadings and in the
argument. But, after all, these divergences give rise to no real
distinction between the two cases, and we hence treat them as one.
At the outset, in order to state in the most direct way the
grievances which the publishers deem they have suffered, we
reproduce, retaining the italics, the statement made on that
subject in the opening passages of the argument of the counsel for
the Lewis Publishing Company:
Page 229 U. S. 298
"The newspaper law whose constitutionality is in this suit
called into question is neither in form nor substance a law to
regulate the carriage of the mails, but
to regulate
journalism."
"In this respect, it has the merit of sincerity. It does not
pretend to be in aid of the Post Office Department. That Department
did not seek its enactment, but protested against it."
"The law in question makes no reference to the mails, except
that it uses exclusion therefrom
as a means of enforcing this
censorship of the press."
"Even this remote connection is wanting in the latter section of
the law, which requires paid reading matter to be formally branded
as an advertisement. Its enforcement is left to a criminal action
for a penalty."
"The law has two plainly avowed objects."
"The first is to compel a disclosure to the government, under
oath, of the names and addresses of the editors, publishers,
business managers, and owners, stockholders, security creditors,
and the daily circulation of such newspapers for the preceding six
months."
"
This will be hereafter referred to as the inquisitorial
provision."
"The second object is to compel a disclosure to the public,
through newspaper publication, of these facts, and also whether any
editorial or reading matter in such publication has been inserted
for a valuable consideration."
"
This will be hereafter referred to as the publicity
provision."
"The publicity provision cannot be referred to any proper
function of the Post Office Department. Its function is to carry
the mails, and in such carriage it cannot matter whether the public
are advised as to the ownership, editorial direction, and
circulation of a newspaper or not, or whether the matter which it
publishes is published for a consideration."
And thus interpreting the assailed provision not as a
Page 229 U. S. 299
mere exertion of legislative power to additionally prescribe the
conditions by which publishers might continue to enjoy the right to
participate in the large pecuniary advantages and other privileges
created in their favor through the classification of mail matter,
but, on the contrary, treating the provision as a substantive
exercise of a legislative authority not possessed, and which unduly
restricted the freedom of the press, thinly disguised as a
regulation of the mails and enforceable by an absolute exclusion
from the right to all mail service, the legal propositions advanced
are as follows:
"1. The Constitution has not, either under the post roads clause
or elsewhere, delegated to the federal government the power (1) to
compel these disclosures, and (2) to direct their publication, or
(3) to compel paid reading matter to be marked as an
advertisement."
"2. The Constitution not only failed to give such power, but it
expressly forbade it, by the First Amendment, prohibiting any law
'abridging the freedom of the press.'"
"3. The requirement that a certain class of newspapers shall
disclose to the public by publication the most intimate details of
their business and use their own capital, labor facilities, and
valuable space for such disclosure, is a taking of 'liberty' and
'property' without due process of law, and a like taking of
valuable property rights for an assumed public use without just
compensation."
On the other hand, putting aside what we deem to be minor
subdivisions, broadly stated, all the contentions of the government
are reducible to the following: (a) that the assailed provision in
no sense can be considered as an attempted exertion of power to
regulate the freedom of the press, or even as the exercise of the
legislative authority to regulate the mails in the larger or
general sense of that term, since, when rightly construed, the
provision only deals with what is known as second-class mail
matter, and imposes conditions necessary to be complied with to
Page 229 U. S. 300
enable publishers to participate in the great and exclusive
privileges and advantages which arise from the right to use the
second-class mail; (b) that the precedent conditions thus imposed
are relevant to the purpose which was intended to be accomplished
by Congress in creating the second-class mail privilege, and are
either directly or incidentally embraced in the power to regulate
the mails, and, in doing so, to confer the second-class privilege;
(c) that even if these propositions be not well founded, and the
provision be given the significance attributed to it by the
publishers, nevertheless it is valid as an exertion by Congress of
its power to establish post offices and post roads -- a power which
conveys an absolute right of legislative selection as to what shall
be carried in the mails, and which therefore is not in any wise
subject to judicial control, even although in a given case it may
be manifest that a particular exclusion is but arbitrary, because
resting on no discernible distinction, nor coming within any
discoverable principle of justice or public policy.
From this statement of the opposing contentions, it is apparent
that the first and fundamental cause of difference arises from the
widely conflicting views entertained concerning the meaning of the
assailed provision, and that hence it becomes primarily necessary
to settle such differences -- that is, to determine the true
meaning of the provision. Moreover, as the controversy concerning
the meaning of the provision involves its relation to the law
concerning the carriage of newspapers in the mails, in force at the
time of the passage of the provision, and an appreciation of its
letter and spirit, it also becomes necessary to consider that law,
its origin, and development.
An abstract of the laws relating to the postal service from
early Colonial times (1639) and under the Constitution down to and
including the year 1888 will be found in the report of the
Postmaster General for the year 1888. A condensed yet comprehensive
statement of the general
Page 229 U. S. 301
results of the legislation from the first statute on the
subject, February 20, 1792, 1 Stat. 235, c. 7, to the Act of May
12, 1910, 36 Stat. 366, c. 230, is contained in the report of the
Commission on Second-class Mail Matter, communicated by the
President to Congress on February 22, 1912, pp. 13-18.
A consideration of the abstract made by the Postmaster General,
above referred to, and of the synopsis contained in the report of
the commission leaves no doubt that, from the beginning, Congress,
in exerting the power to establish post offices and post roads, has
acted upon the assumption that it was not bound by any hard and
fast rule of uniformity; that is to say that, in exerting its power
on the subject of the mails, it has always considered that the
right to classify in the broadest sense was enjoyed, and,
consequently, depending upon conceptions of public good to be
accomplished irrespective of the mere cost of carriage, the rates
of mail have varied and the privileges accorded have changed from
time to time. All the power which has been exerted is derived from
the grant to Congress, in Article I, § 8 of the Constitution, to
establish post offices and post roads. And the wise combination of
limitation with flexible and fecund adaptability of the simple yet
comprehensive provisions of the Constitution are so aptly
illustrated by a statement in the argument of the government as to
the development of the postal system that we insert it as
follows:
"Under that six-word grant of power, the great postal system of
this country has been built up, involving an annual revenue and
expenditure of over five hundred millions of dollars, the
maintenance of 60,000 post offices, with hundreds of thousands of
employees, the carriage of more than fifteen billions of pieces of
mail matter per year, weighing over two billion of pounds, the
incorporation of railroads, the establishment of the rural free
delivery system, the money order system, by which more than
half
Page 229 U. S. 302
a billion of dollars a year is transmitted from person to
person, the postal savings bank, the parcels post, an aeroplane
mail service, the suppression of lotteries, and a most efficient
suppression of fraudulent and criminal schemes, impossible to be
reached in any other way."
Only particularly concerned, as we are, with the legislation
relating to the carriage of newspapers in the mails, we need not
stop to generally demonstrate the accuracy of the statements we
have made. An abstract from and reference to the statutes,
chronologically arranged, relating particularly to discriminations
in favor of the carriage of newspapers in the mail, will be found
in a statement made by W. A. Glasgow, Jr., Esq., before the Postal
Commission of 1906-07, forming part of House Document, Vol. 98,
beginning at 541. And a consideration of the statutes referred to
in this abstract will demonstrate the legislative inauguration of
and persistent adhesion to what is aptly described in the report of
the Commission on Second-class Mail Matter as "the historic policy
of encouraging by low postal rates the dissemination of current
intelligence." Indeed, we think also that it is not open to
controversy that a review of these statutes will demonstrate that
it was always conceived not only that Congress might so exert its
power as to favor the circulation of newspapers by giving special
mail advantages, but that it also possessed the authority to fix a
general standard to which publishers seeking to obtain the
proffered privileges must conform in order to obtain them. Nothing
affords a more apt illustration of the assumed existence of the
power in Congress to discriminate on the subject than was shown as
early as 1845 by the Act of March 3 of that year, 5 Stat. 735, § 9,
c. 43, by which, although there was secured to the government a
virtual monopoly in the transportation "of any letters, packets, or
packages of letters" by forbidding the establishment of "any
private express or expresses" for their conveyance on mail routes,
it was declared that the
Page 229 U. S. 303
restrictions should not apply to the transportation of
newspapers, pamphlets, magazines, and periodicals.
But it is useless to pursue the subject in detail, since, as the
result of legislation, beginning with the Act of March 3, 1863, c.
71, 12 Stat. pp. 704
et seq., and embracing statutes which
are noted in the margin, [
Footnote
1] it had come to pass on August 24, 1912, when the provision
here assailed was enacted, that mail matter, disregarding mere
subordinate subdivisions, was divided into four general classes --
the first class embracing letters and printed matter, the
second-class covering newspapers and periodicals, the third, books
and pamphlets, and the fourth merchandise. And it is obvious and is
not disputed that the classification thus adopted was based not
upon merely inherent distinctions or differences in the nature and
character of the articles as mailable matter and the cost of their
carriage, but rested upon broad principles of public policy -- in
other words, upon the conceptions of Congress as to how far it was
wise for the general welfare to give advantages to one class not
enjoyed by another. It is not necessary to stop to enumerate the
exceptional privileges and great advantages which were offered to
publishers of newspapers by the classification thus adopted, since
it is not questioned that, as a result of giving them the benefits
of the second-class rates, pecuniary advantages of great
consequence to them resulted which, when conjoined with the
exceptional administrative and other privileges which were accorded
under that classification, undoubtedly operated a very great
discrimination in
Page 229 U. S. 304
their favor. It was obviously this result of the legislation
which caused the Postmaster General, at page 6 of his report to
Congress for the year 1907, to say that, "by acts of Congress
passed in 1874, 1879, 1885, and 1894, a privileged class has been
created." And, without going into detail or intending by citing
them to treat the figures as being other than illustrative, the
subject is illumined by a statement made in the brief for the
government that the rate for first-class or letter mail is of such
a character as to produce a profit of seventy millions a year to
the government, while for the second or newspaper class, the rates
are such as to entail upon the government a loss of seventy
millions of dollars each year -- a result which it is moreover
stated is brought about by the fact that letter mail under the
classification is subjected to a rate eighty times higher than that
given newspapers under the second-class, and that, while not so
large, a very great discrimination also exists against the other
classes and in favor of the second-class.
But the mere distinction between the classes is not the only
measure of the exceptional privileges accorded to publishers, for
within the second-class under which they are placed, advantages are
given them not possessed by others in that class. For instance, the
postage on a newspaper coming under the second-class rate when
mailed by an individual is higher than is the rate of postage
exacted for the mailing of the same newspaper by publishers or news
agents. While it cannot be questioned that the conferring of the
special privileges above stated was, at least in form, a
discrimination against the public generally, beyond doubt, however,
in the legislative mind they were deemed not to be of that
character because the purpose of their bestowal was to secure to
the public the benefits to result from "the wide dissemination of
intelligence as to current events." Certain, however, as is this
view, it is equally also certain that, for the purpose of securing
the
Page 229 U. S. 305
public benefits which it was conceived would result from the
giving of the privilege, it was deemed that the power and duty
existed to fix a standard which should be complied with by those
who wished to enjoy the privilege -- a result manifested by the
following provisions of § 14 of the Act of March 3, 1879, c. 180,
20 Stat. 359:
"SEC. 14. That the conditions upon which a publication shall be
admitted to the second-class are as follows:"
"First. It must regularly be issued at stated intervals, as
frequently as four times a year, and bear a date of issue, and be
numbered consecutively."
"Second. It must be issued from a known office of
publication."
"Third. It must be formed of printed paper sheets, without
board, cloth, leather, or other substantial binding, such as
distinguished printed books for preservation from periodical
publications."
"Fourth. It must be originated and published for the
dissemination of information of a public character, or devoted to
literature, the sciences, arts, or some special industry, and
having a legitimate list of subscribers;
Provided,
however, That nothing herein contained shall be so construed
as to admit to the second-class rate regular publications designed
primarily for advertising purposes, or for free circulation, or for
circulation at nominal rates."
And the long settled administrative practice in enforcing these
conditions serves to show what was deemed to be their importance
and the necessity for applying them to the end that the results
intended to be accomplished by Congress might be realized. Prior to
1887, the enforcement of the conditions exacted as a prerequisite
to the enjoyment of second-class mail privileges depended upon the
action of postmasters throughout the United States, and although in
the discharge of their duty they were governed by regulations and
instructions promulgated by the Post Office Department, there was
certainly laxity
Page 229 U. S. 306
and possible confusion. In 1887, to remedy this condition, under
the authority conferred upon him by Rev.Stat. § 396, the Postmaster
General promulgated new rules and regulations. It suffices briefly
to point out the means by which uniformity in administration was
secured. Those desiring to obtain the second-class privileges were
compelled to make written application for entry of their
publications at the local post office, to file copies of the
publications, to make affidavit to the essential facts, and to make
written answers to questions propounded which were deemed to be
essential to show the existence of the conditions precedent imposed
by the statute. A copy of the questions required to be answered are
in the margin. [
Footnote 2]
Page 229 U. S. 307
One controlling authority for passing upon all applications for
entry was provided by vesting the Third Assistant Postmaster
General with power to that end, that officer being authorized in
case of approval of the application to empower the postmaster at
the proper office to issue a certificate of entry. Upon the issue
of the certificate, it was made the duty of the publisher to print
upon each copy of the publication, so entered, the following:
Page 229 U. S. 308
"Entered at the post office at _________ as second-class matter
under the act of ____."
It is true to say that these regulations, promulgated in 1887,
modified, in some respects not material here to be considered, were
continuously in force from their adoption up to the time the
statutory provisions here in question were enacted, and had
therefore been in operation for about twenty-five years.
In the light of this statement concerning the evolution of the
law as to mail matter and its classification, as it existed at the
time the provision here involved was enacted, we come to dispose of
the controversy as to the meaning of that provision, the question
which we are called upon to solve being this:
Was the provision intended simply to supplement the existing
legislation relative to second-class mail matter, or was it enacted
as an exertion of legislative power to regulate the press, to
curtail its freedom, and, under the assumption that there was a
right to compel obedience to the command of legislation having that
object in view, to deprive one who refused to obey of all right to
use the mail service? When the question is thus defined, its
solution is free from difficulty, since, by its terms, the
provision only regulates second-class mail and the exclusion from
the mails for which it provides is not an exclusion from the mails
generally, but only from the right to participate in and enjoy the
privileges accorded by the second-class classification.
The reasons which cause us to think this to be the case are
these: (a) because the provision is part of a Post Office
Appropriation Act, and naturally therefore gives rise to the
inference that it concerns the general subject of the mails, there
being an entire absence of anything justifying even a surmise, if
such a point of view could be indulged in under any circumstances,
that Congress was intentionally exerting power not delegated to it,
and consciously
Page 229 U. S. 309
violating an express prohibition of the Constitution, and for
that reason clothed its exertion of power in the disguise of postal
legislation; (b) because the text makes clear the fact that the
legislation was exclusively addressed to the regulation of
second-class mail, and was shaped in contemplation of the long
established law and regulations governing that class. This result
becomes apparent when it is observed that the provision makes it
the duty of the publisher to "enter" his publication, since, by
practice and regulation prevailing during a long period of time, it
had come to pass that the word "to enter" had exclusive relation to
a duty to be performed in order to obtain the benefits of the
second-class classification. In the absence, therefore, of some
express indication to the contrary, no other conclusion is possible
than that the word was used with reference to its received official
and administrative significance. In fact, in view of the history
which we have given of the development of the second-class
classification and the reasons which led to the system of entry,
unless the settled significance of the word be given to it, it
would have no meaning whatever.
Further, we think that because, as finally enacted, the
provision which was in one paragraph as it passed the House of
Representatives, in the Senate was divided into two paragraphs
affords no ground for contending that the requirement as to
advertisements contained in the second printed paragraph is not
embraced within and controlled by the conclusion we have stated. We
say this because the second printed paragraph by reference clearly
manifests that its provision applied to "such" newspapers,
periodicals, etc. -- that is, the newspapers or periodicals covered
by the first paragraph, and which, by its terms, are submitted to
the duty of entry in order to enjoy the privileges conferred. Nor
do we think there is in reason ground to support the proposition
that, because the provision sanctioned the duty to make entry by an
exclusion from
Page 229 U. S. 310
the mails, it hence is a general regulation, and not simply
conferring the right of availing of the second-class privileges.
The proposition assumes that the command is that, for failure to
comply with the conditions imposed, there shall be a denial of the
use of the mails, while in fact the provision is there shall be a
denial of the "privileges" of the mail -- a qualification which, in
view of the great advantages given by the second-class mail
classification and of the fact that, in the reports made to
Congress concerning that classification, attention was directed to
the circumstance that a privileged class was thereby created goes
to show the conscious purpose to provide only for the exceptional
privileges with which the provision was dealing.
Equally wanting in force is the further contention that, because
the regulation in the second paragraph to the effect that paid
matter shall be marked as advertisement is sanctioned by a penalty,
therefore, at least as to such provision, an independent regulation
of the press was intended, divorced from the requirements as to
entry contained in the first paragraph. We reach this conclusion
because when the paragraph referred to is accurately considered, it
makes more cogent the view we have taken, and additionally
demonstrates that the legislative mind, in enacting it, was
sensitively alive to the fact that the provision alone concerned
the privileges of second-class mail, and the administrative rule
which for so many years prevailed on the subject. In other words,
that as, under existing administrative regulations, the exactions
as to entry contemplated conditions existing at the time of the
application for entry, and the condition as to advertisements
concerned conduct of a publisher after entry, which could not
therefore be a condition precedent to entry, a penalty for the
latter was devised in order to harmonize with the requirements as
to admission to the second-class mail.
Page 229 U. S. 311
But even if we were to omit the word "privilege" which qualifies
the exclusion from the mails as provided in the first paragraph, so
as to cause the provision to read "shall be denied the (privileges
of the) mails," there would be nevertheless no room for doubt. As
we have seen, coeval with the establishment of the system of entry,
as the means of securing the privileges of the second-class mail,
and presumably because of the overshadowing advantages and benefits
which were conferred by that system upon those entitled to
participate in them, the right to such admission came to be
indifferently described as "the entry to the mails of newspapers,"
etc., the "publications admitted to the mails," etc., and the duty
which was cast upon the Third Assistant Postmaster General, in
passing upon such subjects, as "the responsibility of finally
admitting such matters to the mail," etc.
See the report
of the Third Assistant Postmaster General, contained in the report
of the Department for the year 1887 at 699, where, after referring
to the regulations concerning entry, the quoted expressions are
employed. Moreover, when it is considered that the provision was
dealing only with the second-class privilege, it cannot in reason
be assumed that conditions were imposed dealing with a subject with
which the statute was not concerned in order thereby to afford
ground for asserting it to be unconstitutional, when the elementary
rule is that every reasonable intendment to avoid such a result
must be indulged in.
United States v. Delaware & Hudson
Co., 213 U. S. 366,
213 U. S. 407.
Without stopping, however, to review the subjects in detail, we
content ourselves with saying that we think neither the reference
to expressions in debate, upon the concession for the sake of
argument that they are competent to be looked at, nor an opinion of
the Attorney General upon which reliance is placed, are adequate to
control or modify the conclusion we have reached as to the meaning
of the provision.
Page 229 U. S. 312
But, granting that room for doubt remains after the analysis of
the text which has preceded, we are of opinion that the legislative
history of the adoption of the provision makes that conclusion
indisputable for the following reasons: 1. Since the bill as
introduced in the House of Representatives contained but one
paragraph, and obviously related to the privileges of the
second-class mail alone; 2d because, although the bill as reported
to the Senate by the committee to which it was there referred was
somewhat modified as to the conditions exacted, and was divided
into two paragraphs, the report of the committee leaves no doubt
that there was no purpose to disintegrate the provision as it
passed the House of Representatives by making two enactments, or to
do anything more than to exact additional conditions for the right
to enjoy the second-class mail privileges, the latter result being
clearly shown by the following excerpt from the report of the
committee. (Report No. 955, p. 24):
"The extremely low postage rate accorded to second-class matter
gives these publications a circulation and a corresponding
influence unequaled in history. It is a common belief that many
periodicals are secretly owned or controlled, and that, in reading
such papers, the public is deceived through ignorance of the
interests the publication represents. We believe that, since the
general public bears a large portion of the expense of distribution
of second-class matter, and since these publications wield a large
influence because of their special concessions in the mails, it is
not only equitable but highly desirable that the public should know
the individuals who own or control them."
As, therefore, the assailed provision, when rightly construed,
only affixes additional conditions for admission to a privileged
class of mail, and it was merely designed to provide for the
continuance on compliance with designated conditions of a system
under which vast sums of public
Page 229 U. S. 313
money were expended, to the end that the power and influence of
the press might be expanded, it results that there was no
foundation for the meaning attributed to the provision in question
by the complainants, and on which the grievances upon which they
relied rested.
We come, then, to determine whether the provision as thus
construed is valid. That Congress, in exerting its power concerning
the mails, has the comprehensive right to classify which it has
exerted from the beginning, and therefore may exercise its
discretion for the purpose of furthering the public welfare as it
understands it we think it too clear for anything but statement;
the exertion of the power, of course at all times and under all
conditions, being subject to the express or necessarily implied
limitations of the Constitution. From this it results that it was
and is in the power of Congress, in "the interest of the
dissemination of current intelligence," to so legislate as to the
mails, by classification or otherwise, as to favor the widespread
circulation of newspapers, periodicals, etc., even although the
legislation on that subject, when considered intrinsically,
apparently seriously discriminates against the public and in favor
of newspapers, periodicals, etc., and their publishers. Although in
the form in which the contentions here made by the publishers which
we have at the outset reproduced, as literally stated, seem to
challenge this proposition by suggesting that the power of Congress
to classify is controlled and limited by conditions intrinsically
inhering in the carriage of the mails, we assume that such apparent
contention was merely the result of an unguarded form of statement,
since we cannot bring our minds to the conclusion that it was
intended on behalf of the publishers to generally assail as an
infringement of the constitutional prohibition against the invasion
of the freedom of the press the legislation which, for a long
series of years, has favored the press by discriminating so as to
secure to it great pecuniary and other concessions,
Page 229 U. S. 314
and a wider circulation and consequently a greater sphere of
influence. If, however, we are mistaken in this view, then we think
it suffices to say that the contention is obviously without merit.
This being true, the attack on the provision in question as a
violation of the Constitution because infringing the freedom of the
press and depriving of property without due process of law rests
only upon the illegality of the conditions which the provision
exacts in return for the right to enjoy the privileges and
advantages of the second-class mail classification. The question
therefore is only this: are the conditions which were exacted
incidental to the power exerted of conferring on the publishers of
newspapers, periodicals, etc., the privileges of the second-class
classification, or are they so beyond the scope of the exercise of
that power as to cause the conditions to be repugnant to the
Constitution? We say this is the question, since necessarily if the
power exists to legislate by discriminating in favor of publishers,
the right to exercise that power carries with it the authority to
do those things which are incidental to the power itself or which
are plainly necessary to make effective the principal authority
when exerted. In other words, from this point of view, the
illuminating rule announced in
M'Culloch v.
Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316, and
Gibbons v.
Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1, governs here as it does in every
other case where an exertion of power under the Constitution comes
under consideration. The ultimate and narrow question, therefore,
is are the requirements of the provision in question incidental to
the purpose intended to be secured by the second-class
classification?
Let us consider the matter from the historical and from the
inherent standpoint. Under the statute, as we have seen, for a long
series of years, a publication primarily devoted to advertisements
was not entitled to the benefit of the second-class classification,
and by a long administrative construction, embodied in the
regulations, the disclosure of the names of the proprietors as well
as of the
Page 229 U. S. 315
editors of a publication which has sought to be entered as
second-class matter was required. The new conditions imposed are
first, that, where there is matter the publication for which is
paid for, the fact of such payment shall be disclosed by marking
the matter as an advertisement, and second, the disclosure as to
ownership, etc., previously exacted, is enlarged by making it
necessary in the case of a corporation to furnish the names of the
stockholders, and also requiring that the names of the principal
creditors, etc., be given. As the right to consider the character
of the publication as an advertising medium was previously deemed
to be incidental to the exercise of the power to classify for the
purpose of the second-class mail, it is impossible in reason to
perceive why the new condition as to marking matter which is paid
for as an advertisement is not equally incidental to the right to
classify. And the additional exactions as to disclosure of
stockholders, principal creditors, etc., also are as clearly
incidental to the power to classify as are the requirements as to
disclosure of ownership, editors, etc., which for so many years
formed the basis of the right of admission to the classification.
We say this because of the intimate relation which exists between
ownership and debt, since debt, in its ultimate conception, is a
dismemberment of ownership, and the power which it confers over an
owner is, by the common knowledge of mankind, often the equivalent
of the control which would result from ownership itself. Considered
intrinsically, no completer statement of the relation which the
newly exacted conditions bear to the great public purpose which
induced Congress to continue in favor of the publishers of
newspapers at vast public expense the low postal rate as well as
other privileges accorded by the second-class mail classification
can be made than was expressed in the report of the Senate
committee, stating the intent of the legislation which we have
already excerpted -- that is, to secure to the public in
Page 229 U. S. 316
"the dissemination of knowledge of current events," by means of
newspapers, the names not only of the apparent, but of what might
prove to be the real and substantial, owners of the publications,
and to enable the public to know whether matter which was published
was what it purported to be, or was in substance a paid
advertisement. We repeat that, in considering this subject, we are
concerned not with any general regulation of what should be
published in newspapers, not with any condition excluding from the
right to resort to the mails, but we are concerned solely and
exclusively with the right on behalf of the publishers to continue
to enjoy great privileges and advantages at the public expense -- a
right given to them by Congress upon condition of compliance with
regulations deemed by that body incidental and necessary to the
complete fruition of the public policy lying at the foundation of
the privileges accorded.
It may be deemed from what we have said in considering the
asserted repugnancy of the conditions imposed by the provision
under examination that we have assumed that, if the attack made
upon such conditions was well founded and they therefore would
disappear, nevertheless the right to continue to enjoy the
second-class mail privileges would remain; but we have not
considered that subject, and intimate no opinion upon it.
Finally, because there has developed no necessity of passing on
the question, we do not wish even by the remotest implication to be
regarded as assenting to the broad contentions concerning the
existence of arbitrary power through the classification of the
mails, or by way of condition, embodied in the proposition of the
government which we have previously stated.
Decrees affirmed.
[
Footnote 1]
Act of June 8, 1872, c. 335, §§ 99
et seq., 17 Stat.
296; June 23, 1874, c. 456, §§ 5
et seq., 18 Stat. 232;
July 12, 1876, c. 179, § 15, 19 Stat. 82; March 3, 1879, c. 180, §§
7
et seq., 20 Stat. 358; June 9, 1884, c. 73, 23 Stat. 40;
March 3, 1885, c. 342, 23 Stat. 387; July 16, 1894, c. 137, 28
Stat. 105; June 6, 1900, c. 801, 31 Stat. 660; May 12, 1910, c.
230, 36 Stat. 366.
See also Act of August 24, 1912, c.
389, 37 Stat. p. 551.
[
Footnote 2]
From Postal Laws and Regulations-1902 ed., p. 198.
"
V
. APPLICATIONS FOR ENTRY OF PUBLICATIONS AS SECOND CLASS MATTER."
"SEC. 438. When a publication, not included in sections 429 and
430 (see sections 427 and 428), is offered for mailing for the
first time at the second-class rates of postage, the postmaster
shall require the proprietor or his duly authorized representative
to make and present to him, with two copies of the publication,
sworn answers in writing (on Form 3501) to the following
interrogatories:"
"(1) How often is the publication issued?"
"(2) Where is the 'known office of publication?' (If in a city,
give street and number.)"
"(3) Where is it printed?"
"(4) Who are the proprietors?"
"(5) Are they in any way interested pecuniarily in any business
or trade represented by the publication, either in the reading
matter or in the advertisements? If so, what is the interest?"
"(6) Who are the editors of the publication, and how is their
compensation determined?"
"(7) Have the editors any pecuniary interest in any business or
trade represented by the publication, either in the reading matter
or in the advertisements? If so, what is the interest?"
"(8) Can any house in good standing advertise in your
publication at the regular published rates?"
"(9) Are advertisements of competitors accepted at the usual
rates?"
"(10) Have any of the business houses which advertise in your
publication any interest (either by past connection or special
contract) therein respecting advertisements or subscriptions? If
so, what is the interest?"
"(11) What is the greatest number of copies furnished to any
person or firm advertising in your publication?"
"(12) On what terms are these papers furnished?"
"(13) What number of copies do you print of each issue?"
"(14) What number of
bona fide subscribers have you for
the next issue of your paper, made up as follows:"
"a. Direct individual subscriptions to publisher without
premium?"
"b. Direct individual subscriptions to publisher with
premium?"
"c. Direct individual subscriptions in clubs or through clubbing
arrangements?"
"d. Copies regularly sold over publishers' counter to purchasers
of individual copies?"
"e. Copies regularly sold by newsboys?"
"f. Regular sales of consecutive issues by news agencies?"
"g. Bulk purchases of consecutive issues by news agencies for
sale without the return privilege?"
"h. Copies to advertisers, one to each to prove
advertisement?"
"i.
Bona fide exchanges, one copy for another, with
existing second-class publications?"
"(15) What is the subscription price of your publication per
annum?"
"(16) How many pounds weight will cover the papers furnished to
regular subscribers?"
"(17) What average number of specimen copies with each issue do
you desire to send through the mails at the pound rate?"
"(18) How are the names of the persons to whom sample copies are
to be sent obtained?"
"(19) What disposition is made of the excess, if any, of copies
printed over those furnished to subscribers, news agents, including
newsboys, and as sample copies?"