Barrett v. United States (1898)
1898 United States Supreme Court case

Barrett v. United States, 169 U.S. 218 (1898), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that South Carolina had never effectively been subdivided into separate judicial districts. Therefore, it was held, a criminal defendant allegedly tried in one district for a crime committed in the other had in fact been permissibly been tried in a separate division of a single district.
Facts of the case
The defendant, Charles P. Barrett, was one of a group of men in Spartanburg, South Carolina, alleged to have been involved in a conspiracy to defraud companies selling items by mail order. Barrett, apparently an attorney, arranged to have post offices established in rural areas with the name of each post office being the name of another defendant (e.g. Owens, McElrath, Wyatt). Companies sending mail to those individuals would thereby be led to think that the individuals were proprietors of the respective post offices. Barrett also created a letterhead on which to send orders for goods, in order to further induce the trust of the companies from which orders were placed, and his co-conspirators ordered goods including encyclopedias, a piano, an organ, a desk, and a safe, none of which were ever paid for. The fraud was far reaching, as the trial court reported that parties coming to testify that they had been defrauded:
...came from New York and Chicago, from New Jersey and Pennsylvania, from Boston, Baltimore, and Atlanta, from Washington, Richmond, and Savannah, from Charlotte and Augusta...
Barrett and his co-conspirators were charged with conspiracy to defraud, and the trial was held in the United States circuit court in Columbia, South Carolina, before judge William H. Brawley.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Barrett v. United States (1898)” is 1898 United States Supreme Court case. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Barrett, United and States, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “1898 United States Supreme Court case” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 30, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q4863453. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1898.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Barrett v. United States (1898)”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Barrett v. United States (1898) primary sources, Barrett v. United States (1898) archive and Barrett research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Barrett v. United States (1898)”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Barrett v. United States (1898)” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.