Evening Star Newspaper, January 13, 1930, Page 4

COAST GUARD FUND BOOSTED BY HOUSE More Ships, New Planes and Larger Personnel Are Pro- vided for in Bill. By the Associated Press, Provisions were made for a larger and more powerful Coast Guard to carry on its anti-smuggling activities and rescue work at sea in the annual ‘Treasury-Post Office supply bill submit- ted to the House today by its appro- priations committee. Additional ships, increased personnel, new seaplanes, more stations and more cadets to fill the quota of officers are provided for under the measure, which appropriates $32,123,040 for the Coast Guard, an increase of $2,452,000 over the outlay for the current year. Of the amount $16,807,190 is set aside for anti-smuggling work and combating ac- tivities of rum runners off the coasts. ‘The building program, calling for an outlay of $3,550,000, provides for the rcompietion of & new cutter and the com- mencing of another, the taking over of 12 destroyers from the Navy and the construction of 5 patrol and 10 icket boats. Five seaplanes are to be ught at a cost of $80.000 each, and a station is to be established at Quil- layute River, Wash,. at a cost of $45.000. In testifying_before the committee, R ar Admiral Billard, commandant of the Guard, said the increased equipment and additional personnel allowed last year had aided that branch to better enforce the anti-smuggling laws, par- ticularly against rum runners, although there had been some increase in smug- gling along the New England coast in recent months. During 1929, Admiral Billard said, the Coast Guard seized 210 vessels loaded with liquors, an increase of 20. In all, he said, his organization re- ported or seized 2,571 ships for law ;zglauunns, an increase of 1,017 over Admiral Billard said that during the past year the Coast Guard had res- cued 4,375 persons, and vessels with their cargoes valued at $49,000,000; had cared for 879 versons in distress and had rendered assistance more than 9.000 times in major instances. CHURCH DEMANDS ‘DRY’ ENFORCEMENT Temperance Board Would See $200,000t000 Spent if That Is- Necessary. Declaring that enforcement of pro- hibition “is nct a question of dollars and cents,” but that as much as $200, 000,000 should be appropriated, if nec- essary, to bring obedience, the Board of Temperance and Social Service of the Methodist Episcopal Church South has come out with a broad legislative program which would also “make the Capital City of the Nation the ‘model city,’ in respect to enforcement of law.” ‘The statement, issued jointly last night by Bishop James Cannon, jr., chairman, and Dr.E. L. Crawford. secretary of the board, squarely backed up the recom- mendations of the President’s Law En- forcement Commission sent to Congress today by President Hoover and advo- cated passage of the Sheppard bill for making the buyer equally guilty with the seller of liquor. Administration of the law by its “friends” and an extensive development of an educational policy in support of the eighteenth amendment also were recommended. The statement called for money to “meet the need for adequate enforcement, whatever the amount may be.” “We positively insist that when men openly flaunt their determination to violate any law of our country the Gov- ernment must suppress anarchy and compel obedience to the law, absolutely Tegardless of cost,” it said. “It is not a question of dollars and cents—$25,000,000, $50,000.000, $100,- 000,000 or $200,000,000,” it continued, “From the financial standpoint alone, the cost of enforcement is small, com- pared with the great economic benefits which have come from prohibition, even at its worst, ¢ * ¢ “In the name of the General Con- ference we petition that the law shall be administered by its friends. It is a well known fact that many officials, high and low, connected with the ad. ministration of the prohibition law have not simply been indifferent, but frequently openly hostile.” Urging the passage of the Sheppard bill, the statement said that “nothing would have as great psychological, as well as actual value, as to put the brand of the criminal upon the so-called high society people, even though men of prominence and influence, when they deliberately strike hands with the lowest criminals, oftentimes murderers, in violating the Constitution to gratify & purely sensual appetite.” The statement praised the “efficiency shown by Dr. J. M. Doran, the com- missioner of prohibition.” UNIFIED BORDER PATROL IS SOUGHT BY TREASURY HEAD (Continued From First Page.) Immigration Service on our Mexican and Canadian boundaries and will cover the same territory as those patrols, thus complementing the work of the Coast Guard on the maritime boundaries, eliminating duplication of effort, con- centrating responsibility for the protec- tion of all our borders and bringing about a more effective co-ordination of the work. Border Survey Is Necessary. Preliminary surveys have established the practicability of the plan. An actual physical examination of our border, however, will be necessary prior to the final designation of points of entry or the closing of trails and un- traveled roads. The work must be done in harmonious co-operation with our neighboring countries, and their con- sent obtained as a matter of courtesy. It is believed that at least six months will be required before the new border patrol can be organized and the pre- liminary work completed. The cost of maintaining the unified border patrol will exceed the present cost of maintaining our customs and immigration patrols, and additional im- migration and customs stations will be required. Surveys upon which esti- mates of the increased costs can be based are under way and soon should be ‘completed. Very sincerely, A. W. MELLON, Becretary of the Treasury. U-Boat Warfare. . LEIPZIG, (®).—A chapter in Ger- ‘many’s U-boat warfare was closed here when two members of the crew of the U-56, which torpedoed a British hospitalyship in 1916, were acquitted of treason.” They were accused of having delivered their c:grtlln into the hands of the British ough an agent In ‘Spain, i THE EVENING STAR, WASHINGTON, D. C. MONDAY, Text of Report on Prohibition Problems ‘The following is the text of the pre- liminary report on the observance and enforcement of prohibition of the Na- tional Ccmmission on Law Enforce- ment and Observance: Ever since the organization of this commission on May 28, 1929, it has been giving careful consideration, among other things, to the question of the observance and enforcement of the eighteenth amendment and the national prohibition act. The problems presented have been nu- merous and difficult. It was urged upon us from certain sources that we proceed at once to hold public hearings on this subject, but we con- ceived it to be more useful to make a careful study of the whole question, securing information from the re- sponsible officers of Government and from printed reports, as well as from hearings before committees of Con- gress, before embarking upon public hearings. While we are not ready to make a final report on the subject, we have reached certain conclusions which we are transmitting to you with this communication. The ex- tent and complexity of the problem perhaps may be strikingly presented by reference to a few outstanding facts, Scope of Dry Problem. Scope and size of the problem as to observance: It is impossible wholly to set off observance of the prohibi- tion act from the large question of the views and habits of the American people with respect to private judg- ment as to statutes and regulations affecting their conduct. To reach conclusions of any value we must go into deep questions of public opinion and the criminal law. We must look into the several factors in the at- titude of the people, both generally and in particular localities, toward laws in general and toward specific regulations. We must note the atti- tude of the pioneer toward such things. We must bear in mind the Puritan’s objection to adminstration, the Whig tradition of a “right to revolution,” the conception of natu- ral rights, classical in our policy, the democratic tradition of individual participation in sovereignty, the atti- tude of the business world toward local regulation of enterprise, the clash of organized interests and opinions in a diversified community and the divergences of attitude in different sections of the country and as between different groups in the same locality. Disregard in Past. We must not forget the many his- torical examples of large-scale pub- lic disregard of laws in our past. ‘To give proper weight to these things, in connection with the social and economic effects of the prohibi- tion law is not a matter of a few months, As to the enforcement, there are no reliable figures to show the size of the problem. But the reported arrest in the last fiscal year of up- ward of 80,000 persons from every of Continental United States indicates a staggering number of what might be called focal points of infectign. To these must be added the points of possible contact from without, along 3,700 miles of land boundaries, substantially 3,000 miles of frontage on the Great Lakes and connecting rivers (excluding Lake Michigan), and almost 12,000 miles of Atlantic, Gulf and Pacific shore line. Thus, there are about 18,700 miles of mainland of the Continen- tal United States, at every point of which infection is possible. are no satisfactory esti- mates of the number of roads into the United States from Mexico and Canada. The number of smuggling roads frem Canada is reported as at least 1,000, and on the Mexican bor- der there are entrances into the United States at most points along & boundary of 1,744 miles. Difficulty of Policing. To deal with an enforcement problem of this size and spread, the Federal Governn;ex& can draw ;ml}; on a portion of the personnel o three Federal services, whose staffs aggregate about 23,000. Approxi- mately one-tenth of this number is in the investigative section of the prohibition unit. Of the remaining 20,000, only a small proportion of the personnel is available for actual preventive and investigative work. ‘The remainder is engaged in work far different from prohibition. ‘These figures speak for themselves: I Administrative Difficulties.—A fre- uent complaint is that the Federal &cvemmem is prosgcuting small cases and not getting at those re- sponsible for the large supplies of illegal liquor. To get at the smug- glers, the wholesale distributors and thoss who manufacture and divert on a large scale, it is necessary to have either an integration of the forces working at the supply and distribution ends, or & close work- ‘With respect to both liquor and na cotics, it is frequently stated by enforcement officials and those who study phases of the problem that the Federal officials who deal with local or retail distribution upset many an investigation which might lead to the sources of supply, and, on the other hand, investigators who are dealing with sources are fre- quently ineffectual in getting at persons who control the sources. Adjustment Not Easy. ‘To adjust the machinery of Federal administration, as it had grown up for other purposes, to this huge problem of enforcement of prohibi- tion is not easy and will require much _further study. Unification, centralization of responsibility and means of insuring co-operation be- tween Pederal and State agencles are things to which we must come, quite apart from the ‘exigencies of enforcement of prohibition, but which cannot be achieved over- night. III. Legal Difficulties and Proposed Remedies.—When we come to the legal difficulties in enforcement, it is possible to speak with much more assurance as to what may be done at once by way of improvement. Pending study of the whole sub- ject, there are certain features of Federal enforcement of the law as it stands with respect to which the testimony of judges, district attor- neys and enforcement officers is gen- eral and substantially unanimous. If on no other grounds than to give the law a fair trial, there are ob- vious and unconverted difficulties, abundantly pointed out by experi- ence, which may, d, as we think, should be met 50 as to make en- forcement more effective. Summarily stated, these difficulties are due to (1) the division of enforcement be- tween the Treasury Department and the Department of Justice, (2) the disordered condition of Federal legis- lation involved in enforcement, (3) the possibilities of evading or de- feating injunction proceedings, com- monly known as padlock injunctions, by means of transfers and conceal- ments of persons interested in prop- erty used for manufacture and sale of {llicit liquor, and (4) the con- gestion of petty prosecutions in the Federal court, requiring great de- lays, interfering seriously with gen- eral business, and leading to whole- sale disposition of accumulated cases under circumstances impair- ing the dignity of and injuring re- spect for those tribunals, Without prejudice to any ulti- mate conclusions, we think that in the interest of observ- ENFORCEMENT DIFFICULTIES Some of the difficulties in prohibition enforcement as reported by the Law Enforcement Commission follow: Division of enforcement between the Treasury and Justice Departments. Disordered condition of Federal legislation involved in enforcement. Possibilities of defeating padlock injunctions by means of con- cealing ownership of property used for manufacture and sale of illicit liquor. Congestion of petty prosecutions in the Federal courts, leading to wholesale disposition of accumulated cases under circumstances impairing the dignity of, and injuring respect for, those tribunals. “Bargain days” in some courts, which have done much to create the feeling that the law cannot be enforced. . . . Some of the suggestions which the commission made for en- forcement: If it is possible to deal with this matter adequately with the existing machinery of the Federal system, it should be done. A statute authorizing the district attorneys to prosecute by com- plaint or information would obviate the long delay, unnecessary ex- pense and needless keeping in session of grand juries which are demanded by the present state of the Jones law, which expressly recognizes a class of casual or slight violations, In such cases, when so prosecuted, the penalty suggested would be a fine of not more than $500 and imprisonment in jail without hard labor not to exceed six months, or both. ¥ The definition by Congress of the term “casual or slight viola- tions.” Speedy convictions and certain impositions of penalties are im- portant considerations, and are more likely to be efcacious than threats of severe punishment rendered nugatory by congested dockets. Petty cases gle heard before a United States commissioner and a report made to the courts, which would pass judgment on the case. There would be a safeguard that the accused, if found guilty, could demand trial by jury within three days. . . . Some of the important excerpts from the report follow: “We must not forget the many historical examples of large-scale public disregard of laws in our past,” the report sald, adding that “we must bear in mind the Puritan’s objection to administration, the Whig tradition of a ‘right of revolution,’ the conception of natural rights, classical in our policy, and the democratic tradition of individ- ual participation in sovereignty.” .- . . “we think that our suggestions could not in anywise interfere with ;‘nvy ultimate program which we may have to recommend, and would in the meantime advance observance of the law. If it is pos- sible to deal with this matter adequately with the existing machinery of the Federal system, it should be done. We fl"llnk such a solution entirely possible and in the right line of progress.” are advised that open, persistent and extensive violators of the law have been enabled to escape so-called padlocking of their property in this way. ‘We think this grave defect may be met by a simple amendment adding to section 22, title II of the national prohibition law & provision that if in a proceeding under that section it is made to appear to the court that any person unknown has or claims an interest in the prop- erty or some part of it, which would be affected by the order prayed for, it may order that such person be made a party by designating him as unknown owner or claimant of some interest in the property described. It should go on to provide that such person and any defendant who is absent from the jurisdiction or whom, whether within or without the jurisdiction, it is impracticable to serve otherwise, or who is shown to the satisfaction of the court to be concealing himself for the purpose of evading service of process or of any order of the court, may be served in accordance with the provisions of section 57 of the judicial code. ‘Would Add Strength. The use of injunction proceedings as a means of enforcement is so im- portant that this provision for reach- ing unknown claimants, mnon- dents, and residents who conceal themselves to evade service of process, would add very greatly to other department and turned over the efficacy of the statute. It con- to the Department of Justice for tains nothing which is not already trial. done in the States generally when private claims to property are con- cerned. (D). Provisions for relieving con- gestion in the Federal courts. From various parts of the country come complaints of congestion of the Federal courts, due to the large vol- ume of petty prosecutions under the national prohibition act. Obviously, these prosecutions must go on. - It would not do to create an impression that minor infractions are to be ig- nored. As things are, however, the congestion of prosecutions in the Federal courts for minor infractions, caused by the necessity of proceed- ing by indictment in all cases, ex- cept for maintenance of a nuisance or for unlawful possession, is a seri- ous handicap to dealing vigorously with major infractions and makes handling of the minor infractions perfunctory. It has done much to create a feeling in some localities that the law cannot be enforced. In our opinicn, the delays and oppor- tunities for escape from punishment thus occasioned may be and should be obviated. Means to That End. Three methods to this end have been suggested. First, to increase the number of Federal judges; sec- ond, to create inferior Federal courts, or, as it has been put, Fed- eral police courts, for such cases; and, third, to utilize the present ma- chinery of the courts. meeting the causes of delay and congestion by a simpler procedure for petty cases. ‘There are constitutional questions to be considered in connection with both the second and the third of these proposals. The first does not involve any constitutional difficulties. But it leaves the cumbersome pro- cedure by indictment, wholly inap- ?mprlne to minor infractions, in ull force and multiplies the appa- ratus designed for great cases in or- der to deal with small ones. The ob- Jections to this method are palpable, and it should not be odopted if the situation may be met in some other way. So with the second. It in- volves some of the constitutional questions which must give us pause in connection with the third. But, what is more to be thought of, there are serious objections to multiplinyg courts. If it is possible to deal with this matter adequately with the ex- isting machinery of the Federal sys- tem, it should be done. We think such a solution entirely possible and in the right line of progress, not merely in the enforcement of the na- tional prohibition act, but of all Federal legislation. Rights of Defendants. Under the fifth amendment, no one shall be held to answer for a capital or other infamous crime un- less on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury. As cogstrued by the Supreme Court, “infamous crime” means one punishable by imprisonment in & penitentiary, or for more than one year, or for any period, if at hard labor, Hence, where imprisonment is to be in jail, is not to exceed six months, and is not to be at hard labor, the crime is not infamous. It is only where there is a ibllity of imprisonment in the penitentiary, or for more than a year, or at hard labor, that an in- dictment is required. The Jones law has expressl: ized & class of “casual or ll{‘hl lations.” A statute providing that in prosecu- tions under title II of the national prohibition law the district attorney may, in case of “casual or slight vio- lations,” prosecute by complaint or information, and in such cases, when 80 prosecuted, the penalty for each offense should be a fine not to ex- «ceed $500, or imprisonment in jail l without hard labor, not to exceed six months, or both, would ol ance of and respect for law, the na- tional prohibition law may well be strengthened and its effectiveness increased in these important par- TS. tic:l‘in) Transfer of investigation and preparation of cases to the Depart- ment of Justice. There is very general agreement among those who have had to do with enforcement of prohibition that the whole task of enforcement through the courts, as distinguished from the granting of permits and administration of regulations as to the legitimate use of alcohol or of liquors, should be concentrated in the Department of Justice. It is an anomaly that the cases are investi- gated and prepared by agencies en- tirely disconnected with and not answerable to those which are to prosecute them. All experience of administration shows the importance of concentration rather than dif- fusion of responsibility, If prosecu- tion, the legal side of enforcement, is partitioned between two distinct agencies, the diffused, ill-defined non-located responsibility is sure in the long run to be an obstacle to efficiency. No doubt in certain special situations, where technical knowledge of a special type is in- volved and where the number of prosecutions each year is very small, it is consistent with a high degree of efficiency to have these few cases investigated and prepared by some body of experienced men in some Inexpedient With Volume. But where the volume is so enor- mous and the circumstances are so varied as in liquor prosecutions, this is not expedient. To dispose of such & mass of cases satisfactorily there must be a well organized co-ordin: tion of investigation and prosec tion, which can only function ef- fectively when under g single head, with responsibility definitely placed, 50 that there can be no falling down between two distinct bureaus and no lapsing at either point into a per- functory routine. There must be careful study of how to separate the permit-granting work of the Treas- ury Department, which belongs there, from the work of investigation and prosecution, which should all be done in the Department of Justice. But the principle of transfer of the Iatter to the Department of gJustice is, we think, clear. (B) Codification of Federal legis- lation applicable to inforcement of prohibition. Enforcement of prohibition in- volves resort to more than 25 stat- utes, enacted at various times dur- ing 40 years, many of them much antedating the eighteenth amend- ment. As they stand, they are in form disconnected, unwieldly and in much need of co-ordination and ad- Justment to each other. It has been urged upon us, from many parts of the country, by those charged with administering them, and we find it true on examining them, that they are much in need of being put in order, revised and simplified. Revision and Digestion. ‘We recommend tha$ all Federal legislation applicable to the enforce- ment of prohibition be revised and digested with a view of making it a unified whole in the form of a sim- pler, better ordered and hence more workable code. In our judgment, this will make for much greater ef- ficlency. As things are, it is some- times far from easy for those charged with enforcement to find all the law bea: on their powers. Such things are all to the advan of the commercialized law-breaker who commands excellent advice on points which, at the crisis of action, the enforcement officer may have to look up hurriedly for himself. We recommend a codification of the laws on this subject as an important step toward better enforcement. (C) Provision for making so- called padlock injunctions more ef- fective. Long before the national prohibi- tion act, it had been found that the jurisdiction of courts of equity to abate nuisances could be made a most effective way of dealing with many forms of vice. Nearly two generations ago this jurisdiction was applied to violations of State liquor laws and it was later applied with good results to violations of laws against prostitution. The national prohibition law took advantage of this experience and provided for in- Junctions in causes where property was habitually used in connection with violations of that law. Law Well Concelved. ‘These provisions are well con- celved and are capable of doing much toward making the law effec- tive in action. But means of evad- ing them have been discovered in certain limitations of psocedure growing out of the need of serving process upon the persons interested in the property. By conveying some small fraction of the title to & non- resident, or by resident owners, landlords or tenants concealing tlil!mlelvl‘s -n;l ev-dlnlhwvu urvl‘:l" of process, such progeedings are in- creasingly rendered nugatory. We \ the long delay, unnecessary expense and needless keeping in session of grand juries, which are demanded by the present state of the law. We think also that it would be expedient for Congress to define the term ‘“casual or slight violations.” Speedy convictions and certain im- position of penalties are important considerations, and are more likely to be efficacious than threats of severe punishment rendered nuga- tory by congested dockets overpass- ing any possibilities of trial in the manner constutionally appointed for crimes of such magnitude. May Not Be Vital. But this suggestion, made on general considerations applicable to all criminal laws, and out of abun- dant caution, may not be a vital part of the plan. Next, to simplify the mode of prosecution of petty cases, we must consider the matter of pleas of guilty and of trials. As the law is, every offender must be indicted, must await indictment before he can plead guilty, even if ready to do so at once, and his case must, is he pleads not guilty, awalt its turn on the calendar, obstructing, if it is a petty case, the disposition of important cases. The mere ac- cumulated number of these petty prosecutions awaiting trial has be- come a source of embarrassment in many Federal courts. Sectlon 3 of Article III of the Constitution requires trial of all “crimes” to be by jury. The sixth amendment provides that “in all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial Jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed.” Petty Offenses Not “Crime.” It has been held that “crime” in this connection does not refer to petty offenses. In view of the gen- eral holding of State courts on analogous provisions and of the concessions and _distinctions made by the Supreme Court of the United States in the leading case of Cal- len vs. Wilson, 127 U. S. 540, 355, 557, we think it is poissble to pro- vide for a hearing in the United States District Court before a magis- trate, provided trial by jury in that court is preserved to the accused. But we see no need of setting up special Federal magistrates. It would seem entirely feasible to make use of the existing system of United States commissioners. It could be provided that in case the accused, prosecuted by complaint or information, pleads guilty, such plea may be reported by the commis- sloner to the court and judgment of conviction rendered and sentence imposed by the court. Then it could be provided that in case the accused 50 prosecuted pleads not guilty, there shall be a hearing before the commissioner, who shall report to the court, and the court on examina- tion of his findings renders judg- ment of acquittal or conviction as the case may be, and in case of con- viction is recommended by the com- missioner, the accused may, within three days after filing of the com- missloner’s report, except in writing to the report and demand trial by jury. Finally, it could be provided that in such’ case the district at- torney may elect whether to go to trial on the complaint or informa- tion, or to submit the case to the grand jury, and that in case the grand jury indicts the case shall then proceed upon the indictment. ‘The Jones law was enacted to make enforcement more efficacious in two ways: (A) By providing for more severe penalties in the discre- tion of the court; (B) by making available the collateral consequences of a felony, such, for example, as the rules of law applicable to pre- vention of & felony and the capture of felons. This was done by making every violation of the national pro- hibition act a potential felony. Features Are Retained. The foregolng suggestions aim at preserving this feature of the ex- isting law. Up to the time when the district attorney elects how to prose- cute there is a potential felony. In other words, all the possibilities in the way of arrest and prevention which obtain under the existing law are conserved. But the intention is to make it possible in case of “casual or slight violations” (language of the Jones law) to prosecute as a petty offense, thus relieving con- gestion in the Federal courts, main- taining the dignity of those tribunals and making possible speedy disposi- tion. As thing are now the cumber- some process of indictment must be resorted to even in the most petty case. The result is that large num- bers of these cases pile up and have to be disposed of offhand by “bar- gain day” and similar unseemly Pprocesses. Judge Holds Discretion. In any case which the District attorney elects to prosecute by in- dictment the judge will still have the discretion provided for in the existing law. If it is objected that a wide discretion is put in the Dis- trict attorney by the proposed legis- lation, the answer is that he has that discretion already in effect, simply exercising it, not in the be- ginning by the mode in which he prosecutes, but later by including any particular prosecution in _the wholesale disposition on some bar- gain dav Thus, & few simple legislative en- actments, in our opinion, could be made greatly to strengthen enforce- ment of the national prohibition law. Such measures, making it more adequate to its purposes, are sug- gested by study of material which has come to us from all agencles concerned with its administration. We think they could not in any wise interfere with any ultimate program which we may have to recommend, and would in the mean- :Ame advance observance of the aw. Respectfully for the commission, GEO. W. WICKERSHAM, Chairman. Dated November 21, 1929. SAYS IMMIGRATION LAW IS NOT BEING ENFORCED California Joint Committee Tells Congress Lack of Penalties for Violators Blocks Action. By the Assoclated Press. SAN FRANCISCO, January 13.—The California joint immigration committee yesterday forwarded a formal com- munication to the immigration com- mittee of the House of Representatives, in which it charged “the immigration restriction act is not being enforced, and cannot be enforced, because of the ab- sence of provisions of the apprehen- sion, punishment and deportation of | the; violators.” The Blease act providing punishment for illegal entry, the letter to the House committee said, is of comparatively little value in the absence of machinery to apprehend and deport those who are guilty, Enactment of legislation for the purpose indicated was urged. statement declared that since 1921 the United States had acquired approximately 2,000,000 deportable aliens and is ad to the number at the rate of about 000 are JANUARY 13, 1930. LAW GROUP URGES “PADLOCK TEETH’ Crime Commission Suggests Ways of Closing Up Legal Loopholes. (Continued From First Page.) aration of cases to the Department of Justice from the Treasury Department. Codification of Federal legislation applicable to enforcement of prohibi- tion. Provision making so-called padlock injunctions more effective. Provisions for relieving congestion in the Federal courts, ‘With regard to the last, the Law Enforcement Commission said that complaints of congestion of the Federal courts came from all parts of the coun- try, “due to the large volume of petty prosecutions under the national pro- hibition act.” “Obviously,” sald the commission, “these prosecutions must go on. I would not do to create an impression that minor infractions are to be jgnored.” Three Methods are Possible. Three methods for relieving conges- tion of the Federal courts, the commis- sion said, had been suggested. One was to increase the number of Federal Jjudges: the second, to create inferior Federal courts, or Federal police courts, and the third, to utilize the present machinery of the courts, meeting the causes of delay by a simpler procedure for petty cases. The commission leans strongly to the tbird proposal. In effect, thy commission proposed that, in order *o avoid the necessity of grand jury preceedings and the conges- tion of Fedr<al court calendars with minor casey » infractions of the pro- hibition laws, legislation be enacted which would permit prosecution by com- plaint or information, through the dis- trict attorney, with the penalty for such violations fixed at fines not to ex- ceed $500 or imprisonment in jail, with- out hard labor, not to exceed six months. “This would obviate,” sald the com- mission, “the long delay, unnecessary expense and needless keeping in session of grand juries, which are demanded by the present statute of the law.” Commissioners Could Be Used. ‘The commission said further that it believed much delay could be obviated by the hearing of such petty violations of the law before a magistrate, provided trial by jury is reserved for the accused it it be demanded. The commission sees no need of setting up special Fed- eral magistrates, but holds that the ex- 1sting system of United States commis- sioners could be used. Such procedure, the commission holds, would be entirely constitutional. At the outset of its report to the President the Law Enforcement Com- mission defended its course in not hold- ing open hearings on prohibition at once. It gave the impression, however, that later it might open its hearings on prohibition, saying: “It was urged upon us from certain sources that we proceed at once to hold public hearings on this subject, but we conceived it to be more useful to make a careful study of the whole question, securing information from the responsi- ble officers of Government and from printed reports, as well as hear- ings before committees of Congress, be~ fore embarking upon public hearings.” Group Recently Under Fire. | . The commission has recently been un- | der attack in Congress because it has | not held open hearings on prohibition. The commission called attention to the need of going deeply into the ques- ll.lon of observance of the prohibition aws, “It is impossible,” it said, “wholly to set off observance of the prohibition act from the large question of the views and habits of the American people with respect to private judgment as to stat- utes and regulations affecting their conduct. To reach conclusions of any value, we must go into deep questions of public opinion and the criminal law. We must look into the several factors in the attitude of the people, both gen- erally and in particular localities, to- ward laws in general and toward spe- cific regulations. We must note the :rtfiuude of the ploneer toward such Ings. “‘We must bear in mind the Puritan’s objection to administration, the Whig tradition of a ‘right of revolution,” the conception of natural rights, classical in our policy, the democratic tradition of individual participation in sovereign- ty, the attitude of the business world toward local regulation of enterprise, the clash of organized interests and ol]::n(uns in a diversified community, and the divergences of attitude in different sections of the country and as between different groups in the same locality. ‘We must not forget the many historical examples of large-scale public disregard of laws in our past. To give proper weight to these things, in connection with the social and economic effects of the prohibition law, is not a matter of & few months.” Transfer Is Recommended. While the commission recommended the transfer of investigation and Ppreparation of cases of liquor law viola- tions from the Treasury to the Depart- ment of Justice, it held that the issue of permits for industrial alcohol and 50 forth should be retained in the Treasury. The need of the transfer of the preparation of liquor cases to the Department of Justice was given by the commission in the following language: “It is an anomaly that the cases are investigated and prepared by agencles entirely disconnected with and not answerable to those which are to prosecute them. All experience of ad- ministration shows the importance of concentration rather than diffusion of responsibility. If prosecution, the legal side of enforcement, is partitioned be- tween two distinct agencies the diffused, ill-defined, non-located responsibility is sure in the long run to be an obstacle to efficlency.” Reliable Figures Are Lacking. The commission complained that there were no reliable figures to show the size of the problem of prohibition enforcement. But it added that the reported arrest in the last fiscal year of upwards of 80,000 persons from every pari of continental United States in- dicates & staggering number of what ;r‘x;ght be called focal points of infec- “To these must be added the points of possible contact from without, along 3700 miles of land boundaries, sub- stantially 3,000 miles of frontage on the Great Lakes and connegting rivers (ex- cluding Lake Michigan), and almost 12,000 miles of Atlantic, gulf and Pa- cific shore line. Thus, there are about 18,700 miles of mainland of the con- tinental United States at every point of which infection is ble. ‘The commission sald that the number of smuggling roads from Canada is reported as upwards of 1,000, and that 'Te are entrances into the United States from Mexico almost unlimited along & border 1,744 miles in extent. Third of Personnel Available, “To deal with an enforcement prob- lem of this size and spread,” it con- tinued, “the Federal Government can draw only on a portion of the personnel of three Federal services, whose staffs aggregate about 23,000 Only one- tenth of this number, it says, is in the the investigative section of the prohibi- 000 & year, while puly h_uon unit. The commission gave extended -dis~ President’s Message Hoover Proposes Six Change: to Remedy Abuses. (Continued From PFirst Page.) lence shows division of authority, xi‘e:r;l:omlblmy and lack of fundamental organization in Federal enforcement agencies .t'i::d offtimes results in inef- fective action. ‘While some sections of the American people may disagree upon the merits of some of the questions involved, every responsible citizen supports the funda- | mental principle that the law of the land must be enforced. The development of the facts shows the necessity for certain important and evident administrative reforms in the enforcement and judicial machinery, concrete proposals for which are avail- able from vacmllllent departments. They are in the main: 1.y Reorganization of the Federal court structure so as to give relief from congestion. 2. Concentration of responsibility in detection and prosecution of prohibi- tion violations. 3. Consolidation of the varlous agencles engaged in prevention of smuggling of liquor, narcotics, other merchandise and aliens over our fron- tlers. 4. Provision of adequate court and prosecution officials. 5. Expansion of Federal prisons and reorganization of parole and other practices. 6. Specific legislation for the Dis- trict of Coumbia. I append hereto a preliminary and a supplementary report from the Com- mission on Law Observance and En- forcement, relating to several of these and other questions. I particularly call attention to their recommended plan for reducing congestion in the Federal Courts by giving court com- missioners enlarged powers in minor criminal cases, Their discussion of the ‘workability and the constitutionality of the plan, which is concurred in by the eminent jurists upon the commission and others whose advice they have sought, is set out in more detail in the supplementary report. I also ap- pend memorandums from the Attorney General and the Secretary of the Treasury upon several phases of these problems. I believe the administrative changes mentioned above will contribute to cure many abuses. Beyond these immediate questions are others which reach deep- ly into the whole question of the growth of crime and enforcement of the laws, The causes of crime, the character of criminal laws, the bene- fits and liabilities that flow from them, the abuses which arise under them, the method by which enforcement and Jjudicial personnel is secured, the judi- clal procedure, the respective responsi- bility of the Federal and State gov- ernments to these problems, all require further most exhaustive consideration and investigation, which will require time and earnest research as to the facts and forces in action before sound opinions can be arrived at upon them. cussion to the need for making padlock injunctions more effective in compelling observance of the prohibition laws. Owners of property on which repeated violations of the law have taken place have escaped the padlock provision of the law by evading service or concealing their identity. The commission would amend the law so as to make it impos- sible for these evasions. Could Not Interfere, He Says. In conclusion the commission’s report, which is signed by George W. Wicker- sham, its chairman, said: Thus a few simple legislative enact- ments, in our opinion, could be made greatly to strengthen enforcement of the national prohibition law, Such measures, making it more adequate to its purposes, are suggested by study of material which has come to us from all agencles concerned with its ad- ministration. We think they could not in any wise interfere with any ulti- mate program which we may have to recommend, and would in the mean- Hmse ldtv‘lnce b;blervmce of the law.” ecretary ellon of the Treas Department, in his memormdumurrz the President, transmitted by the lat- ter to Congress along with the special message, recommends particularly the strengthening of the border patrol to guard against violations of the pro- hibition and other laws. Attorney General Mitchell, in his memorandum to the President, said that his department had been co-operating with the Law Enforcement Commission in the preparation of proposals to be Droduce’ s T mcdinte baprovees 1 luce ‘an ment in the enforcement of laws. Recommends Careful Action. He recommended that the question of congestion in the courts receive the utmost consideration. He pointed out that reports from United States attor- neys showed that during the six months terminated December 31, 1929, 28,437 prohibition and narcotic cases had been commenced; that 25,887 such cases had been terminated, and that 20,066 such cases were pending on December 31, !123}“ lncdrmemover t&m pending une an over those December 31, 1928. P The Attorney General commended the recommendation of the Law Enforce- ment Commission that United States Commissioners be used to hear petty Violations of criminal laws. He favored, too, the transfer of detection agencies, dealing with the prohibition laws, from the Treasury Department to the De- partment of Justice, ‘The Attorney General recommended increases in the number of prosecuting aitorneys and increases in their pay. “There has already been prepared, continued the Attorney General, d submitted to Congress a complete plan for reorganization of our prison system, including probation and paroles, which directly relate to enforcement of crim- inal laws. I have also submitted to the chairman of the Senate committee on the District of Columbia specific recom~ mendations relating to the District, so no further mention of these matters is required.” Transfer Bill Is Commended. In & supplemental report, which was transmitted to Congress today by the President with the preliminary report of the Law Enforcement Commission, the commission commended a bil, agreed upon by the Department of Jus- tice and the Treasury Department, for the transfer of investigation and prep- aration of prohibition cases to the De- partment of Justice, ‘The commission also commended a draft compilation of the prohibition laws made by the Bureau of Prohibi- tlon. The commission added that it would submit another report soon “in which we shall present a fully worked out codification.” The commission went into much de- tail regarding its proposals for making the padlock injunction more effective ;&g t]ar mrl'l:vln' congestion in the leral courts through the ter use of United States eommudm‘;:. Belgian Rail Workers Strike. BRUSSELS, January 13 (#).—Several thousand workers emplo; in the Malines Railway shops went on strike today for higher wages. There were reports that this was the first move in a contemplated general strike which may be expected on the eve of the and opening of the world fair in Antwerp | to the Liege, by her rest at the canyon, LAW ENFORCEMENT REMEDEES URCED Attorney General Mitchell Tells Hoover “Obvious Defects” Must End. ___(Continued From First Page) suggestion comes from the Commission on Law Observance and Enforcgment in the form of a proposal to useé the United States commissiners for dfpos- ing of a large number of criminal cases, thus speeding up the wokk and reliev- ing the Federal judges of burdensome details. There are some canstitutional questions involved, but, in my opinion, these do not present insurmountable difficulties, and the validity of the pro- posal is supported by such eminent jurists and lawyers are George W. ‘Wickersham, Henry W. Anderson, New- ton D. Baker, Judge William 1. Gnubb, Judge William S. Kenyon, Monte M. Lemann, Frank J. Loesch, Judge K&g' neth Mackintosh, Judge Paul J. Mé- Cormick and Roscoe Pond, who are members of the commission. If legisla~ tion along these lines can be made ef- rei:we. a decided improvement will re- sult. “Some additional relief for congested conditions will be afforded by providing additional judges in a few districts al- ready recommended by the conference of Senior Court judges and by me, “Delay in judicial operations through inadequate forces in the clerks. and marshals’ offices may be taken care of by additional appropriations, request for which is already pending before Congress, Detection Agencies Urged. “Agencies for detection of offenses. Since the passage of the national pro- hibition act, the attorneys who con~ duct the prosecutions in court have been under the Department of Justice, while the Federal agency for detecting offenses against the national prohibition act and preparing the evidence has been in the prohibition unit in the Treasury Department. There are no agencies in the Department of Justice authorized to perform the latter func- tion. The closest co-operation must exist between officers charged with the detection of offenses and preparation of evidence on the one hand, and. the United States attorneys and their as- sistants, who prosecute the cases, om. the other hand. These agencies, now in different de- partments, would work together more efficiently if in the same department. A plan has been drafted by the Depart- ment of Justice and the Treasury De- partment to effect such a transfer. It leaves in the Treasury Department the administrative function of issuing per- mits for the manufacture and distribu= tion of industrial alcohol and related matters. These proposals contemplate a revision of the regulations respecting permits so as to provide more ete supervision to prevent diversion from authorized uses, such regulations to be prepared jointly by the Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney General so that the legal experience of the Depart- ment of Justice in prosecutions under the national prohibition act may be utilized in the drafting of the regula- tions. This plan also contemplates that in any case in which the Department of Justice has information bearing on the merits of an application for a per- mit a representative of the department shall participate in the decision as to whether the permit shall issue. “Prosecuting attorneys: However. efficient the detection agencies may be, and however well equipped to handle the business the courts may be, in order to produce good results the prosecuting force—that is, the United States attor- neys and their assistants—must be efficient. Some additional force and some increases in the rates of pay should be provided for these officials to enable us to procure and retain the services of competent lawyers. I have mentioned this before. Requests for additional funds for this purpose have been made and await congressional action. If the amounts we have asked for prove to be insufficient, request for additional amounts may be made. “Attention should again be called to the necessity for reorganizing and co- ordinating the forces charged with patrolling the borders to prevent smug- gling. “An important recommendation for amendment to the national prohibition act is that relating to so-called |- lock injunctions. It is intend to remedy jurisdictional difficulties which arise under the existing law. Prison Reorganization. “There has already been prepared and submitted to Congress a complete for reorganization of our prison s including probation and paroles, which' directly relate to enforcement of crim- inal laws. I have also submitted to the chairman of the Senate committes. on the District of Columbia specific recommendations relating to the Dis- trict, 0 no further mention of these matters is required. Summary. “To summarize, I recommend: “First—Immediate consideration of legislation to relieve congestion in the United States Courts by— “Enlarging the powers and duties of the United States Commissioners. “Providing some additional judges. “Appropriation of funds for enlarging and improving personnel in the clerks’ and marshals’ offices. “Second—Immediate consideration of legislation to transfer to the Depart- ment of Justice the agencles for the. detection of offenses under the national’ prohibition act. “Third—Appropriation of funds to increase the rates of pay and to provide additional forces in the offices of the; United States attorneys. 4 “Fourth—Amendment to padlock in- Jjunction provisions of the national pro= hibition act. “In respect to prohibition, attention has recently been directed more to Fed- eral than to State agencies for enforce- ment. Placing all Federal agencies in good order is not the only requirement, It has never been contemplated that the whole task of enforcing prohibition should be borne by the Federal Govern- ment. Any constructive plan for better prohibition enforcement must give at« tention to improvement in State as as Federal agencles, and to the adjust-, ment between them of the burden .of enforcement.” - —— ORTIZ RUBIO’S SOJOURN IN ARIZONA INDEFINITE By the Assoclated Press, 3 PHOENIX, Ariz., January 13.—Tele pho;e d:um\;lngfm'.‘h"m was :‘anbunh yesterday e party Ortiz Rublo, president-elect of Mexicg, which is stopping at the Grand Canyon,; Z. 7 Speaking for the president-elect, hif secretary, Eduard F. Chazaro, said no announcement has been made Senor Rublo as to when the party o leave for Mexico City. January 15 was set yesterday as a tentative date. ‘The Canyon was not isolated, he said. ‘Trains were maintaining their schedules, although Saturday the worst snowstorm in 18 years struck the can« flon. disabling telegraph and telephone ines. The party is “taking it Chazaro said. The chief executive ation e proj Pacific Coast, was much.