(1.) The Attorney-General at Washington advised, _after_ reading the Harman criticism, to place the case in the hands of the District Attorney. (2.) The case was known to the Postmaster-General and to Mr. Comstock, and these men were appealed to in vain to stop the prosecution. (3.) Mr. Comstock, in a letter to the _Woman's Journal_, characterized the mailing of _Christian Life_ as violation of the law, _and this before the trial occurred_. If Mr. Comstock, as his letter to the Woman's Journal indicates, regarded the mailing of _Christian Life_ a violation of the postal laws, why was no notice taken of it by him or his Chicago agent for almost a year? _Why this culpable dereliction of duty_ until _after_ the anti-vice society and the postal department had been criticised by Mr. Caldwell? It matters not, for the point I wish to emphasize, whether the persecution of Mr. Caldwell, was, as appearances would lead one to infer, a retaliatory stroke in punishment for presuming to criticise the postal department and anti-vice society, or whether the censorship was asleep for the space of ten months and only chanced to wake up after the editor pointed out the iniquity of their proceedings in a case where they had shown _uncalled-for vigilance_. The fact as shown forth indicates the power and possibilities for evil inherent in an enactment which _permits_ any censorship to wield such power without _attaching severe penalties in the event of its being unjustly wielded_, for sooner or later, unless these safeguards are present, evils of the gravest character will follow. The other serious evil which this case most signally emphasizes, cannot be too frequently or strongly stated, and that is, the cruel wrong, the great injustice which a citizen of this republic may suffer, when perfectly innocent, while those who have persecuted him and are guilty of a serious offence before the moral law, escape unscathed. Thus, we find in this case, after many months of weary suspense, months of harassment and anxious thought, and after being put to an expense which to one in Mr. Caldwell's circumstances was very large, when his case came up for trial before one of the ablest judges in the city, it was promptly dismissed, the judge ruling that the defendant had not violated the law, as had been charged. He was allowed to go forth a free man, but he had no redress against those who had unjustly persecuted him. He was in no way recompensed for the _money which he had had to expend to establish his innocence_, or paid for the _great anxiety and harassment of soul he suffered_. The spectacle of an innocent man robbed by the process of law of his money and peace of mind, yet left with no redress, is humiliating to every person who loves justice. A nation may sometimes err on the side of mercy with safety, but no government _can afford to be guilty of a palpable injustice even to one of her humblest citizens_.