While the fraudulent advertisements covered by the provisions of
§ 215, Criminal Code, prohibiting using the mails for
advertisements, may not include those which merely puff the article
to be sold by exaggerating its qualities, it does prohibit using
the mails for fraudulent statements assigning to such article
qualities which it does not possess.
An article alone is not necessarily the inducement and
compensation for its purchase, but the use to which it may be put
and the purpose it may serve, and there is deception and fraud
within the meaning of § 215, Criminal Code, when the article
is not of the character represented, and hence does not serve the
purpose.
Persons employing such representations, if they are false, are
engaged in a scheme to defraud within the meaning of § 215,
Criminal Code.
The demurrer to an indictment under § 215, Criminal Code,
having been sustained and the government having appealed under the
Criminal Appeals Act, and the appellee having contended that the
court below passed only on the sufficiency of the indictment, and
did not consider the statute,
held that, although such
contentions did involve a consideration of the indictment, they
involved also the construction of the statute; but, in reversing
the district court as to its action in sustaining the demurrer,
this Court has no intention of controlling the district court in
its construction of the indictment and, so remands the case.
The facts, which involve the construction and application of
§ 215 of the Federal Criminal Code, are stated in the
opinion.
Page 241 U. S. 65
MR. JUSTICE McKENNA delivered the opinion of the Court.
This writ of error is directed to a decision of the district
court, sustaining a demurrer to an indictment, and is prosecuted
under the Criminal Appeals Act, it being contended by the
government that the decision involved the construction of §
215 of the Criminal Code. The opposing contention is that the court
passed only on the sufficiency of the indictment as a criminal
pleading, and that therefore the writ of error should be dismissed.
The contentions are repeated here, and make the issue. They
necessarily require a consideration of the indictment. It is
constituted of three counts. Their foundation is § 215,
supra, which, so far as material, reads as follows:
"Whoever, having devised . . . any scheme or artifice to
defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or
fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises, . . . shall, for
the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, or attempting so
to do, place, or cause to be placed, any letter, . . . circular, .
. . or advertisement, . . . in any post office, . . . to be sent or
delivered by the post office establishment of the United States, .
. ."
etc.
The section is a somewhat enlarged successor of § 5480,
Revised Statutes, which provides:
"If any person having devised . . . any scheme or artifice to
defraud, . . . shall, in and for executing such scheme or artifice,
or attempting so to do, place any letter . . ."
etc.
As showing a violation of § 215, the first count of the
indictment charged the following facts, which we state narratively:
the individual defendants are directors and stockholders of the New
South Farm & Home Company, a corporation engaged in selling
approximately 142,000 acres of land, referred to as the
Burbank-Ocala colony and
Page 241 U. S. 66
the Florida-Palatka colony, situated in Putnam, Marion, and Clay
Counties, Florida. They devised a scheme to defraud certain
persons, who were named, and other persons of their money and
property with the intention to convert the same to the use and gain
of the defendants and the corporation, by means of correspondence
and communications through the post office establishment of the
United States, and by means of oral and verbal communications, by
offering to sell to such persons, and inducing them to purchase,
certain 10-acre farms upon certain terms through false and
fraudulent representations concerning the title, fertility, value,
drainage, location, environs, and survey of the farms, and the
improvements made or to be made thereon.
The representations were these: the lands and farms were not
swampy; the largest ocean steamers operating between New York and
Jacksonville could load at Palatka; a family could make enough on
one farm during the first year to support itself and save money;
three crops a year could be grown; every month in the year was a
growing month -- that is, some farm or truck product could be
raised during each month of the year; the farms were surrounded
with orange and citrus fruit groves and vegetable truck farms; the
farms had fine roads running through them, were high and well
drained, and, on the whole, like the lands of Kansas, Nebraska,
Iowa, and Illinois; artesian wells were scattered about on the
farms or "could be obtained by going down 100 feet;" the land was
divided into 160-acre tracts; roads were being built around each
160-acre tract and each 10-acre farm would face on a road, and
ditches were being dug so that each farm would be drained; many
miles of fence had been erected and hundreds of homes and many
schoolhouses had been built; the schoolhouses were more than
comfortably filled with pupils, and more schools would have to be
built to take care of the rapid growth of the colonists settling
upon the farms; comfortable
Page 241 U. S. 67
hotels had been built upon the lands and farms and improvements
of all kinds were going forward at a wonderful rate; lumber was
cheap and homes could be built without nearly so great expense as
in most places in Florida and at about one-half of the expense the
same would cost in the North; the Title Guarantee Company of
Jacksonville, Florida, would guarantee the title, with which
company the New South Farm & Home Company had made arrangements
so that purchasers might know that their investments were safe; the
farms were cut over and ready to go upon at once, and there were no
timber leases upon the lands; the defendants were not land brokers
or speculators; the New South Farm & Home Company owned the
land outright, the title having been approved by the best
attorneys, and anyone buying a farm could depend upon securing a
clear title, as the company was selling something it owned itself;
the farms were free from mosquitoes, malaria, and insects of all
kinds and were below the frost line; the company had secured
telephone connections with Palatka and with local exchanges at
other places (they are named) which would place every farm "in
direct touch with the community at all times;" the lands and farms
were located high and dry and in a section well drained; hundreds
of people had settled on them and at the little city of Burbank the
lands and farms had increased -- doubled, trebled, and quadrupled
-- in price, and the same was true of the lands owned by the
company at Silver City, and a thousand settlers were on the lands
who could sell them at a large profit; land selling at $30 an acre
would be worth in two years $200 and $300 per acre; well stocked
stores and factories were located upon the lands, and they were the
best located and the most fertile lands in America, and Luther
Burbank had been arranged with for "the exclusive right for the
production of certain of his farm products;" there would be
installed a Burbank producing
Page 241 U. S. 68
station on the lands and farms, and the purchasers of the latter
would share in the profits of the station, the director of which
would be available for the needs of the purchasers; one could get
out of a Pullman car on the farms, use a long distance telephone,
have the daily paper, rural free delivery, and all the comforts of
home.
There were other representations of fact, and, to give emphasis
to those which we have enumerated, it was charged that the pictures
in the publications sent out by the defendants represented the true
conditions to be seen on the farms.
All of the representations were explicitly repeated and charged
to be false; that defendants well knew them to be so, and intended
by them to deceive the persons to be defrauded, and to induce such
persons to part with their money and property in the purchase of
the farms.
That the representations were made and communicated by the
defendants to the persons intended to be defrauded through and by
means of oral statements, circulars, maps, advertisements,
photographs, etc., so worded, drawn, constructed, presented, and
expressed as to deceive; but all too voluminous to be set forth in
the indictment, where fore the grand jurors omitted them.
That the defendants deposited in the United States mail at
Jacksonville and Palatka, in the Southern District of Florida,
certain publications known as "The New Florida" and "Ten Acres and
Freedom" and certain other letters, prints, pamphlets, magazines,
and publications containing the false representations set out
above, which were addressed to the person intended to be defrauded,
and on which legal United States postage had been paid.
The second count charged the defendants with entering into a
conspiracy to commit the offense described in the first count, and
repeated its allegations and representations, varied only to meet
the difference in the crime
Page 241 U. S. 69
charged. In other words, there were allegations which charged
that the conspiracy was to be accomplished by the representations
enumerated in the first count, that they were false and known to be
so, and made with the same fraudulent purpose, and to be
accomplished by the use of the United States mails. Two letters
from the company, signed by defendant Seig as president, were set
out in the indictment.
The third count was also like the first in its general charges
and designated by name the persons that were intended to be
defrauded. The same representations were charged to have been made
"by publishing and causing and procuring to be published divers
prints, papers, pamphlets, booklets, circulars, and divers
advertisements." The falsity of the representations was declared,
and that the scheme of fraud was to be accomplished by the use of
the United States mails. A letter was quoted.
The defendants demurred to the indictment. The demurrer is a
very voluminous document, and practically defies condensation. It
charges that the indictment does not, nor does any count of it,
"aver and charge any offense against the United States," that each
and every count thereof is insufficient, in that they do not, nor
does either of them, aver the facts constituting a scheme to
defraud; that each and every count is insufficient for repugnancy,
uncertainty, ambiguity, and evasiveness, and that each and every
count is insufficient for want of distinct and adequate
specifications of the particulars wherein the several
representations, called in the count false representations, were
false.
The demurrer then attacks each count separately, and with much
elaboration and with repetition of the allegations of the
indictment sets out with particularity wherein no offense against
the United States was charged.
The court sustained the demurrer, resting its decision
Page 241 U. S. 70
upon the second and third grounds of demurrer, which, we have
seen, charged that neither the indictment nor any of its counts
averred or charged an offense against the United States, or averred
facts which constituted a scheme to defraud. It was said,
"The scheme to defraud is alleged in the first and third counts,
and the conspiracy count also sets out the same scheme. So that, if
the scheme to defraud set out in each of said counts is not such a
scheme as is punishable under the law, the entire indictment must
fail."
Describing the representations, the court said they "are as to
the quality of the land, climate, crops to be raised, advantages to
be obtained, and promises of improvement, etc." And further:
"There is no denial of the facts of the ownership of the lands,
although there is a denial that all the titles were perfect. Nor is
there denial that the land was worth fully as much as was to be
obtained therefor. For aught that appears in the indictment, the
lands to be obtained were worth fully as much as was to be paid by
the parties purchasing; that the parties engaged in the sale were
legitimately engaged in the sale of the lands."
The court regarded the business as legitimate, and held that the
statute was not violated by puffing the qualities of the article
sold in advertising it. In other words, as the court expressed it,
"raising the expectations of the purchaser, but giving that
purchaser value received for his money, but not fulfilling those
expectations" was not an offense against the statute. And further,
the court said that the deduction from the authorities referred to
by counsel
"is that the scheme must be one to defraud the party, or, by
false promises, pretenses, etc., deprive him of money or property
without adequate value. Mere puffing or exaggeration of qualities,
usefulness, opportunities, or value of an article of commerce,
where the purchaser gets the article intended to be purchased,
Page 241 U. S. 71
and the value of the article is measured by the price paid, do
not constitute the false representations, promises, etc., denounced
by the statute."
We have made these excerpts from the opinion of the court the
better to handle the contentions of the parties, which, as we have
seen, are quite accurately opposed, the government asserting that
the court construed the statute, and thereby justifying its appeal
to this Court, the defendants insisting the court construed only
the indictment as a pleading, and that therefore this Court is
without jurisdiction.
We concur in the view of the government. The court, we think,
construed the statute, and misapprehended its import. Mere puffing,
indeed, might not be within its meaning (of this, however, no
opinion need be expressed) -- that is, the mere exaggeration of the
qualities which the article has -- but when a proposed seller goes
beyond that, assigns to the article qualities which it does not
possess, does not simply magnify in opinion the advantages which it
has, but invents advantages and falsely asserts their existence, he
transcends the limits of "puffing" and engages in false
representations and pretenses. An article alone is not necessarily
the inducement and compensation for its purchase. It is in the use
to which it may be put, the purpose it may serve, and there is
deception and fraud when the article is not of the character or
kind represented, and hence does not serve the purpose. And when
the pretenses or representations or promises which execute the
deception and fraud are false, they become the scheme or artifice
which the statute denounces.
Harris v. Rosenberger, 145 F.
449;
O'Hara v. United States, 129 F. 551, 555;
Colburn
v. United States, 223 F. 590;
Wilson v. United
States, 190 F. 427.
See also United States v. Barnow,
239 U. S. 74.
Especially is this true in the purchase of
Page 241 U. S. 72
small tracts for homes, and upon this, if the allegations of the
indictment are true, the defendants touched every string of desire
by false statements, and sounded every note that could excite and
delude. We need not repeat the representations, and they were made
graphic, it is alleged, by pictures and photographs.
Indeed, if it could be admitted that the article offered for
sale and its price could be balanced, the one against the other,
the price necessarily would be the expression of value, and be
constituted of all the attributes of the article, intrinsic and
extrinsic, and it needs no comment to show that a 10-acre farm with
the character, environments, and facilities described, its price
doubling, trebling, and quadrupling within a year, has a seduction
more powerful than one not advancing in value, but, it may be,
receding -- that is, of swampy, not of highland, character, without
fertility, hotels, roads, artesian wells, citrus groves, Pullman
cars, steamship and other facilities which the literature of
defendants describes and the indictment alleges.
We can entertain no doubt that those employing such
representations, if they are false, have engaged in a scheme to
defraud. The defendants did not seem to be afraid of repelling by
excess, and extravagance was even used in a personal communication.
In a letter which was set out in the indictment it was said:
"Our settlers are arriving daily and occupying their farms. The
land is being rapidly cleared, crops are being planted, houses
erected, stores built, and, on the whole, it is impossible for us
to set forth in a letter to you exactly how stupendous is the work
that is going on there. Without a question of a doubt, the Florida
Palatka Colony is enjoying the greatest prosperity."
Against these considerations, defendants contend that there was,
notwithstanding, only a construction of the indictment, but ask
that, if we are of a different view,
Page 241 U. S. 73
the case be reversed only so far as the statute was construed,
and remanded for action upon the other causes assigned for
demurrer, involving, as they say, the sufficiency of the indictment
as a criminal pleading. The difficulty is to indicate a
distinction. We can only say we have no intention to control the
district court in its construction of the indictment, and we have
no doubt the learned court will be able to adjust its action to
this opinion.
United States v. Portale, 235 U. S.
27,
235 U. S. 31.
Reversed.
MR. JUSTICE McREYNOLDS took no part in the consideration and
decision of this case.