Reader Ad Slot
Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
Supreme Court — Part 8
Page 29
29 / 109
Wemoersitas for tee Directs
T pointe? out to Wr. Ricgely tet the fingersrints and protoyrar.
wrild, of course, be of record in the penitentiary in wich
ftejt.e1s sccwec His time and that surely the Departeent sould act
erpect to de-lete or interfere with the perasieut records of «-.
institution, and trst trere eaxirtec no more reaaoi for the
destruction or return of the records on file in te Identification
Division of tuis Burecu. Wr. Ridgely fully agreed with to-se
Views, enc stated tiat we aigtt auggest to Mr. Benjevin that tre
Bureau ig aithorized by Congreesional enactment to collect
identification records and felt that it would not be authorised
to return such @ record merely becmise of tie restoration of
tre civil rights of 2 oomvict,
In acoordancs with the combined opinions of Mesers. Parrish
a Ridgely, I have drafted a letter of reply t Mr. Renjazis and
will ex.ibit the same to Mr. Parrish in order to have his oote ois
approval thereon before it ja mailed.
Respectfully,
vY. W. Bughoes.
Reveal the original PDF page, then click a word to highlight the OCR text.
Community corrections
No user corrections yet.
Comments
No comments on this document yet.
Bottom Reader Ad Slot
Bottom Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
Continue Exploring
Agency Collection
Explore This Archive Cluster
Broad Topic Hub
Topic Hub
letter
bureau
Related subtopics
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic