Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 3.djvu/489

 182 FBDEBAIi BEPOBTEB. �My opinion îs that no ultra or decisive steps should have been taken by the owner at so early a date. On being advised of the facts the authorities of the United States, in equity, would have been compelled to make compensation, or fall back on the bonds of the company. They would bave no fair claim to use the road, upon notice of the facts shown here, unless by agreement with the owner. But until such notice their right to carry the mail remained the same as before. �Under the view I have taken the defendant should not be discharged, simply by reason or virtue of the order of the circuit court of the county of Morris, giving the owner actual possession. It remains to be considered whether he should be held for any of the acts committed on that day — that is, if they constitute the offence in contemplation of the federal statute. �The defendant denies that such acts on bis part corne within the federal statute, because they were committed under color of right. But the claim of right is set up, too, on the part of the United States, and the fact is that, under the circum- stances, both had color of right. The defendant knew that the relators carried the mail of the United States, and the knowledge of that should have been sufScient to put him on inquiry. I mean on such inquiry that he could have ascer- tained officialîy, and as a matterof certain ty, on just what trains those mails were transported. He claims, also, that what he did was in ignorance of this being a mail train until informed at the place of obstruction, and the statute makes the gist, the intent, of the offence to consist in knowledge; therefore, what he did cannot be brought within its meaning. There is no direct evidence, one way or the other, as to his knowledge or ignorance of the train in question being a public carrier in the service of the United States. So far as appears inferen- tially the testimony would be in his favor if standing alone and disconnected. It is shown, however, that he admitted having placed the obstructions on the track — an act which his ignorance of the nature of the train in this respect, at the time, does not excuse or justify, because it was of an extreme and might have been of a dangerous character. It appears, ����