Page:United States Reports, Volume 209.djvu/350

 324 OCTOBER TERM, 1907. �Opinion of the Court. 209 U.  being opened, to have been intended for the complainer. The letters that re addreded to the defendant by its corpo- rate name cannot be known to have been intended for the complainant until they have been opened. In other words, there is notbAng on the outside of the letters from which it could be determined that they were not intended for the com- pany to which they were addressed by its corporate name, but for the complainant. Some of the letters thus addreded have been, in fact, intended for the defendant company, although a very small proportion of them. As the defendant company used its name long prior to the adoption of a somewhat similar name by the complainant, it is apparent that the confusion which has arisen therefrom in regard to the mail delivered at Chicago is not at all the fault of the defendant company. The whole claim of the complain: ant rests upon the averment that a very large majority of the letters that are addressed to the defendant company by its own name alone are in reality intended for the complsinnt. This fact does not clothe the complainant with the legal right to insist that the Chicago postmaster shall be directed to de- liver all mail of the character in question to a corporation other than that to which the mail is addressed. It is a matter of confusion arising from a similarity of names, wherein the greater proportion of the total amount of the mail thus ad- dreded belongs to the complainant, although not ad to it, 'and yet some portion of the mail thus addre0ed actually belongs to the company to which the mail is in fact addressed. There are no mearof discovering to which company the let- ters belong short of opening them. The compli,,t by adopt- ing greater caution in the matter.of directions to its corre- spondents as to the proper address might probably be able to secure more correctness in the direction of letters intended for it. In the endeavor to discharge its duty the department has provided, in paragraph 4 of �5 of its Postal Laws and Reg- ulations of 1902, the following general regulation:

�