Evening Star Newspaper, December 17, 1930, Page 2

B A—2 xxa HIGH COURT RULING THE EVENING STAR, WASHINGTON, D. C, WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1930. LEGILATURES ERRED IN PASSNGTI| BIN(S10SED [DSTRGTS FSAL || Crax of Dry Gase ON 18th AMENDMENT, SAYS JUDGE CARNELL DENIES | ONDRY LAW ASKED New Jersey Judge’s Opinion Holding Amendment In- _valid Spurs Action. (Continued From First Page) Evans Hughes and George 8. Hobart, | with whom I was asscciated at the time, ted the Anti-Saloon zflu. ‘The point raised by Judge Clark in his decision came up for dis- cussion while we were preparing our briefs and we passed it up as being of little consequence or value to the opposite side as one of their arguments n of their contentin that the, worked two vears on & repcrt holding eighteenth amendment was unconsti- tutional.” Warning to Obey Law. “As far as I am concerned the eight- eenth amendment is still the law of the land. The prohibition gquestion just now is a wilderness and there will scme day be a Moses to lead us out of it. I would not advise my friends to trans- port liquor.” Judge Clark’s decision was the out- come of what amounted to a test case of the contention 0f a committee of the New York County Lawyers' Association that the adoption of the eighteenth amendment was Invalid under the tenth amendment to the Constitution, which modified article 5. Youngest Federal Judge. Judg> Clark at 38 is the youngest |before the United member of the Federal b'nch. He was 0f Appeals in New appointed in May, 1925, by President Coolidge, resigning from the bench of the New Jersey Court of Appeals to ac- cept the Federal prst. His appointment was backed by the late Wayne B. tendent of the Anti- | was his answer to the motion made by Specis] Dispatch to The Star. NEWARK, N. J, December 17.— Judge Willlam Clark's decision hold- ing the eighteenth amendment invalld distinguished counsel to dismiss the ndictment against William Sprague, an gbscure farmer in the hills of Sus. sex, who was arrested for mma\m- ing and possessing 50 half barrels of real beer on March 3. All the lawyers in the case served without fee. The counsel of record was Frederic M. P. Pearse of this eity, former assistant United States attor ney. His assoclates were Dantel F. Cohalan, former Supreme Court jus- tice; Selden Bactn and Jullus Henry Cohen, These t!;’reebe n-lmmho:. !wlhw M. Tompkins of the Depariment o cf New York University, and other members of a special committee of the New York County Lawyers' Association, that the eightcenth amendment wes not part of th» Constitution beceuse it had b2en ratified by the Legislatures instead of by the people in con-ttu- ti*nal conventions in the several Statcs. Argued in Vermont Tase. Their findings, hlet form, were made public by Mr. on under his name, and fell into the hands of Mr. Pearse, who decided to test the issue raised in the report in the Sprague case. Boon thereafter, a Vermont lawyer, formerly of this city, Jeremiah M. Evarts, used the same arguments in his motion to d’'smiss an ind ctment against published in pam- the experience of the United States had shown that in constitutional questions it was sometimes right and necessary to have to_the actual conditions and needs of the Nation; that constitu- tional questions were in s0 far political | that where 1 _consideraticns were nearly balanced, the view ferred which an enlightened the welfare of the Nation suf Vol. I, pp. 510-511. Views of Justice Holmes. “And, finally, our own Justice Holmes: ‘* * % when we are dealing with words that also are a constituent | fet, like the Constitution of the United Stetes, we must realize that they have celled into life a being the development of which could not have been foreseen le | completely by the most gifted of ts be- getters. It was enough for them to real- ize or to hope that th had created an uch swe't and blocd to prove that they |crected a Nation. ‘The case before us | must bz corsidered in the light of our hole experience, and not merely In | thet cf whet was said a hundred ye'rs |ago. Mifoury ve. Holland (1920), 252 16, 433, Po'itical ecience can give only one answer to the question presented by the alternative methods of ratification | preseribed by article 5. If the amend- | ment to be considered is one designed to transfer to the United States powers heretofore reserved to the Btates, or, if there are any Buch, to the people, that Answer must be in favor of the con= vention method. This follows from the Louis E Thibault, indicted for poss=ss- | ing and selling whisky in his home at | W ndsor, Vt. This case was ar‘su:‘d two weeks ago £tate: Crovit Court York, with Judge rtin T. Manton presiding. Mr. | Bacon end former Justice Cohalan | aided Mr. Evarts in arguing the appeal. | Decision in the Thbault case 13 pending. 1 ‘The Thibault case will also be ap-| pealed to the United Etates Supreme | in Newark and is a|Court. Neither case will be reached, | He was bor graduate of Hi B captain in the World War and was cited | & year. for gallai 1in action. In his five years asa judge three of his decisions have been reversad out of 33 cases car- ried to higher courts. Not Before Submitted. Declaring the points he was deciding had never been submitted fo the Su- preme Court, Judge Clark ncted that the fifth article states amendments to the Constitution may be ratified “by the Legislatures of three-fourths of the several States, or by conveniions in three-fourths thereof * Political science,” he wrot ‘can give only one answer to the qu:stion | presented by the alternative methods of ratification prescribed by article 5. If the amendment to b> considered is one d to transfer to tae United States | powers heretofore reserved to the Stat's, | or if there are any such, to the peopl: that answer must in favor of the convention method.” He held his decision should not affect other amendments ratified by State Legislatures, since the only one whose nature in any resp'ct resembled the eighteenth was the thirteenth, the slavery amendment. The distinction, he said, was that the thirteenth am:ndment did not “as does the eighteenth, contain a grant of power t0 regulate and prohibit certain acts.” INTERPRETATIONS VARY. Comment by Wets and Drys Differ on Decision. By the Associated Press. Wi n today evinced a lively interest in the ruling of Federal Judge “Willlam Clark of New .vem{yndecllnnl it invalid. the euhzenm From the dfyk tons the decision would be nfid. ‘which they were joined, to a Certain extent, by_the opponents of the national law. Senator Sheppard, a co-author of the amendment, termed Judge Clark's posi- tion “untenable” and was certeln it would be set aside. Representative Beck of Pennsylvania, a foe of prohibition, said he could “see | no real reason why the Supreme Court should not now invalidate the eight- eenth amendment” but added he thought it improbable that this would be done “at this late day.” Mitchell Is Silent. Attorney General Mitchell and other officlals of the Justice Department de- clined to comment offictally. Informally it wis learned, however, the depart- ment holds the status of prohibition cannot be ;ci::dm until the Supreme Court has 3 Senator Watson. the Republican leader, thought the decision “nst well grounded.” Representative Hudson, blican, Michigan, a prohibitionist, he could see “no point to it, nor any merit.” ator Walsh of Massachusetts said the decision called attention to impors tant issues that “have been privately distussed since the passage of the eighteenth amendment.” “It 18 to be hoped,” he said. “that all questions of constitutionality may go to | the Supreme Court for final settiement 80 that the course of those opposed to the liquor laws as constituted at pres- ent may define an 1 B 4 oukiime N oA acnallp chobtn Tor the piiiptes. Sna for future action.” Drys Condemn Ruling. ‘The dfil 'f"'n their position in ex- pressing lef that the grounds upon Which the decision was made had been held unsound by the Supreme Court years ago. Edward B. Danford, gen- | eral counsel of the Anti-Saloon League, said the contention in the case “is not new” and “was held unsound when first made 10 years ago.” The highest bench has held repeatedly that various attacks on eonstitutional prohibition had no merit. It has re- fused to entertain sev:ral other attempts to break down the amendment. Those who know well the workings of the court hold the view that in matters of this sort it is inclined to a libsral cons struction of the Constitution’s provi- Th- justices thus would be inter- preting the amenément as an ex; ression of the people’s will which shoul over the narrower technicalities, The only direct eff<ct anticipated from Judge Clark's ruling was a possibility that in his jurisdiction authorities might refuse to act against violators. This was entertained by one Govern- ment official here, while others were emphatic in asserting it could have no control over the actions of other district judges even in New Jersey, and that it would not prevent arrests jn ihat State under the national prohibition ac A suggestion was advanced by one dry leader. Oliver W. Stewart, pie-iient of the Flying Squrdron Foundetion. that if the eighteenth smendment held invalid, the thirteenth—it bol- ished slavery—must also fall. 1t, o. was ratified by the Legislatures and not | by conventions. ENGINEER IS CONVICTED ON SMOKE LAW CHARGE; A viclation of the smoke ordinance at the Department of Justice Building, 1001 Vermont avenue, brought about the conviction in Police Court today of Ferdinand E. Phillips, chief enginzer at the State, War and Navy Building, who also has charge of the Justice Buliding Judge Isasc R. Hitt acoepted Phillips’ bond for the offense upon revail | p | ratifi | views. Judg: Clark, were received with silenc | 1 vere | /& quife erree with Prof. Beard in | Machine Age, p. 27.)" Threats Are Alleged. Some drys, ever since Judge Clark reserved decision at the conciusion of the argument on October 9, have been threatening to move for his imprach. ment if he should hand down a deci- These threats, i they reached But his friends, with their deep respec! for his scholarship and his proved cour- age—for he was awarded a silver star for “gallantry in action”—never doubt- ed that anything other than his dis- pass.onate reesoning and fearless in- ierpretation of the law would guide him ih reaching a decision. Judge Clark upheld the contenticn of the counsel who appeared before him in Trenton on October 9, that the question they raised had not been passed upon bwe United States Bu- preme Court W it upheld the eight. eenth amendment in the national rn- hibtion cases. But he did not hold with them that the tenth amendment overrode, conditioned or contravened th> fifth article. Agein, in holding that the eighteenth amenément was invalid beceuse it had becn retified by the Btate Legislatures instead of by the people in Btate con- stitutional conventions, he held with them but differed in r\xlmge that the eighteenth amendment attempted a !nnt of power from the States and not rom the people. Cites 1920 Cases. In his review of the prohibition cases upheld by the United States Supreme Court Judge Clark emphasized that the court, in 1920, only considered the con- stitutionality of the sul matter of the amendment and not thé¢ manner of adoption. t i::‘onum the Supreme onl with refer- enda provisions of State constitutions as it affected such adoption, holding that such referenda not be em- ployed In ratifieation Judge Clark abandoned What he called the stereotyped form of constitutional interpretation and followed the school of thought typified in the writings of lumbia and Justice Holmes, Therefore, placed upon the fifth article a cone struction he held was in aecord with the grinciples of sound government. In su&on of this part of his decision Judge rk wrote: “It seems indisputable that local elf-government, popular sovereignty, and the convention system of drafting and amending Constitutions were the very ‘warp and woof' of the political thought/ of the whole period prior the drafting sand adoption of the Fed- eral Constitution. The thought proc- esses of President Lincoln have come to typify eo much the spirit of our in- stitutions that it may not be inappro- priate to conclude this phase of the fubject with a quotation from his first inaugural addreéss: Favors Convention Mode, “ ‘I will venture to add that to me the convention mode seems preferable, in that it allows amendments to originate with Gh(mfeop'-. themselves, instcad of only permitting them to take or reject which might not be precisely such as they would wish to either accept or refuse. I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution—which amendment, however, I have not seen— has passed Congress, to the effect that the -ral Governmert shall not inter fere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avold misconstrucs tion of what I have said, I depart from my purpost nat to spsak of particular amendments #6 far as to say that, hold- son not in accord with their fixed | Viscount Bryce, Prof. Burgess of Co- | | 25 he explained, he considered the prob- | lei as one of political sclence end | propositions -originated by others, not| cheracter of such emendments and from the cnaracter of the delegates to and deliberations in a constitutional convention, o5 compared with the cor. i chaactsr of the. personnel of £late Leais'atures and their del'bera- tion: ve e that the fundemental nature cof a tiansfer of additional power to the Federal Government has been aade sufficiently plain by the previous exposition of our Federal system, with its shibboleths of local self-government and popular sovereignty.” Numerous cases were cited by Judge He scrved as a [in the opinion of lawyers, for at least ! Clark to support his assertion that a convention, either because of directly instructed or abler delegates, is a bet- ter vehicle for expression of public opinion than a State Legislature. He instanced provisions in the Constitu- tions of the States of Missouri and Florida expressly forbidding the Legis- latures to adopt any amendment or change in the Federal Constitution. He held that this represented the trend of thought, not only of a generation or two 8go, when they were adopted, but the underlying thought of the framers of the Constitution. Then he resumed: “We are quite willing to stand flat- fostadly on our thesis that the scien- tific aproach to this problem of Govern- ment requires an approval and ratifi- cation of certain amendments by and in a convention, and that the language of Article I can be taken as modified by the principles of political seience before stated. For the doubting, how- :v"'u“ ate prepared to lcnll to_our ss'stance two more purely legalistic doctrines. One of thepl"lul was mlved by Judge Jameson with respect to the Proposal of amendments. (It applies a fortiori, and with even greater force to their ratification.) We state it as repeat®d and amplified by Prof. Dodd: Method of Amendment. “‘Judge Jameson has said as to the legislative method of roposing amend- ments: “It ought to confined, it is believed, to changes which are few, simple, independent and of compara- th’!l}" small importance. For a general revision of a constitution, or even for single propositions invoiving radical vch-nnu @8 to the policy of which the | popular mind has not been informed by prior discussion, the employment of this mode is impracticable, or of doubt- ful expediency.” With reference to this latter an'" 1t may be argued, however, that if a constitution specifically pro- vides two methods- of alteration, the language employed with reference to the proposal of amendments by the legis- lative method may, when read with | that concerning the convention method, | often be construed as an implied pro- | hibition of complete constitutional re- vision lative method. Leav-, ing eside the constitutional question, it would seem clearly prelernfie that, when ible, complete revision or even alterations of a very thorough character should be made by conven- | tions expressly chosen for that pur- pose. Legislatures will usually ve their time taken up with other mate- ters and be unable to devote sufficient time t6 this subject, and the election of a body for the one purpose concen- trates public attention n - questions of a constitutional character. %hg eon- vention will ordinarlly be able to do better work than . the legislature be- cauke its attention will be confined to the one task of framing a constitu- . Moreover, it has as a rule been possible to obtain for membership in conventions & higher grade of men than may usually b2 found in the ordinary | legislative bodies, and this constitutes & practical reason of very great im- portance for not weak-ning the func- tions of conventions.'—Dodd, ‘The Re- vision and Amendment of Btate Con- stitutions,” pp. 261, 262. Nature of Proposal. “The second follows from the nature of the congressional act of proposal. | Only one writer that we have found has |att*mpted any distinction between the functions of COn;reu in fixing the cone tent of an amendment and in proposing | the same for appro val. Burgess, Poli- 1uclutclence and Constitutional Law, p. “In the case of Hollingsworth vs. | Virginta. . eouns:]l for the State of Virginia contended that the eleventh amendment had not been properly adopted, bocause it had never been submitted to th» President for his ap- roval, as required by artcle 1, sece fon 7, of the Constitution. The Un'ted States Supreme Court, in a six-line ing such a provicion to now be implisd conatitutional Jaw, I have no objection to its being made express and irreve ceable.’ Rchardcon, Meaag:s and Pap:rs of the President Vel. VI, page 10. “It is oniy fair to point out that in the first part of the above-quoied pos- sage, Mr. Lincoln was discusming the proposal of amencments and not_their lon. His arguments app! a fortiori, however, to the latter process. “We have tried in the preceding pages to do justice to what we have talied the stereotyped method of con- stitutional interpretation. In spite of our conacientious efforis, we cannot help a feeling of impatience et its un- reality. We prefer to regard cur frame of government as a problem in political science, to be solved as far as may be, according to scientific principles. The | Gua’ifications ‘as far as may be' must be included because a written Joon- | ment impos2s ceriain limitoti upon any approecn, rcientific or he: w -e. statement thet a ‘search for the wil the people who made the Consi'tution Serbl: (“The Ameri- ‘The Republic in in- Cites Bryce and Holmes. same impatience appears also in the writings of those whose study of the Constitution has been infinitely more thorough and able than our own. Prof. Burgess in his ‘Political Science and Constitutional Law': “‘There is & growing feeling among our jurists and pub'icists that. in the interpretaticn of, the Constitution, we be sirictly held b~ the in- tentions of the framars, es) the whole fabrie of our rta‘e &0 rbanzfci by the re-ults cf -esellion end civil war, They are bzinning to fe<!, and rightly, tho, that present con- i~ 5-hmen Tecommendation of the corporation counsel’s office. Donald C. Malcolm, hedlth | that when the lany o, rrant doc Phite |t , securéd a Warrant ' arrest, reporting that & dense black | term! - emanated nou‘: the Justice | 15: aiticn-, relations and rejuitements should be the chief consicarsiion, end 5! of the Consti- tion will Bear it should de- he interpretation.’ Vol. 1, pp. fh 52‘-':' Viscount Bryce, in his ‘Studies e A Teplied: that (1769-1807), | his | “‘We are encouraged to find that this | 8o | clally sinne | | op'nion, d-olared the amendment the | action of Congress in formulating and ‘prrPn!ln.’( £m ncments to the Consti« tution was not legiclative. Whatever | en® ‘mey thiak of the loic of this do- cision with respsct to the content of an amendment, the Supreme Court's | estimation of the nature of th: single | act of submi-sion to on® or another body must bs correct. At any rate, | since Congress is not acting in a legis- | lative capacity, it follows, we think, | that the neture of its function is ad- ministrative. ‘That being 8o, it falls within the ordinary principles which gov'rn the judical review of admin- istrativa cction. “The pu e of the emending claure, a3 we have tried to develop it in this opinion, would be violated bv the submicsion of amendments transferr.ng powers from th~ Btat's to tho Unite States, end suth cubmision wou'd, therfcre, con titute pn_nbise of dis- | etetion oh the pert of Congress in its cahreily ns an ad'ninistrat ve egont. “Cnlv the ratifiertion of the e'ghte centh emendm-nt Is b-lore the court for adiudication. Any comment on the method empl-yed in the adoption of | the other 18 would be anoiher ex- | ample of that habit of passing tpon metters not before the court in which the judiciary so often indulge. In one a'pect these amendments may. how- ever, be riinent, e g, from the point of view cf practical or eontem« Pporary construction. . . . “The thirteenth amendment, in our opinion, presents certain points of res semblance to the eighteenth. We lieve it is distinguishable, however, be- huse it strikes down in teims the enlavement of human beings and op- ates directly upon the propsry laws cf any_Stotes pérmitiing thet institu- | tlon. "IL doe: not, as dces the eight- { etnth amendmant,” cont power to regulete end n th's view, an acts. If we are vron of the %msmm'on and extralphtion 1aws of the iates thows, as might be Wu, that the ton { % day and anfi":;‘ ma;nfl wo1ib't certein ‘powers adméndment to be invalid, and % had the motion to quash the indistment 48 % -van-mm- n A grant of { l INVARIOUS STATES Institutions Are in North Car- olina, Arkansas, Ohio, In- diana and Kentucky. By the Associated Press RALEIGH, N. C., December 17.—The Citigens Bank of nurns}nn'e‘. 1}2"000' ‘m.‘h capital and surplus o ,000, Wi fnl:td to close its doors yesterday The State Banking Department was noti- fied today. The last statement showed deposits of $301,872 and resources of $507.808. Ohio Bank Falls to Open. NEW STRAITSVILLE, Ohio, Decem- ber 17 (#).—The Martin State Bank, the only banking institution in New Straits- vlle, failed to open today. C. W. Miller, Columbus, liquidating agent for the State Banking Depart- ment, took charge, saying depreciation of bonds was respensible for the clos- ing. E‘he bank was capitalized at $25,000, and its last statement showed resources of $208,000. Indiana Closing Announced. TMIN‘DIANAPOUB, Mfll = ber w; utionary closing yesterday the mlnd Savings &nl at Rens- selaer was announced today by the State banking department. The institution was capitalized at $100.000, with deposits of $830,000, loans of $770,000, and undivided profits of $19,000, LITTLE ROCK, Ak, Dicembor 17 P).—The State Benking Depar(ment today announced the closing of ten banks in Northwest Arkansas. State banks in the group were placed in charge of the State nk commis- sioner and two naticnal banks turned over to the United States Con- troller. BTURGIS, Ky, December 17 (#)— The Bank of Sturgis falled to open to- day. A notice on the door stated it had been taken over by State Banking Department. The last statement of the oank showed capital of $15,000, resources of $468,838.94 and deposits of $386,514. mitted to the States alone. They also provided for two forms of approving any changes in the frame of govern- ment they had set up. The compul- sory use of the heretofore untried method of -Rprov\ng or ratifying in conventions the transfer of additional powers from the States to the United States is consistent with both the his- tory of our institutions and the prin- ciples of political science. Only & more perfect realization of this fact will per | P! mit our country to be ‘trustfully or- ganized,’ as that expressive phrase used in Progressor Burgess's preamble to his book, 'Political Science and Con- siitutional Law. . . . Cites “Due Process” Clause. “It will be observed that in the course of this opinion there has been no men- tion of the specific subject matter of the eighteenth amendment, such spe- cific subject matter not being germane to the broad principles both counsel and the court have endeavored to lay down. In pondering the questions involved we have wondered Wwhy the eighteenth amendment has not been tested in re- lation to the ‘due process clause’ of the fifth amendment. ‘We should think that such a test might be based on the fol- lowing reascning: The eighteenth amen n'xent doe’s noz‘ -;1“ cm:lhfl m‘!’ unless it expressly so dec! Ho 1 the due process clause of the fifth Any action thereunder rded in the light of what is reasonable. Baltimore R. R. Co. vs. Interstate erce _ Commission 1911), 221 U. 8, 612. The more ad- vanced school of constitutional thinkers consider this ‘reasonableness’ frcm the point of view of the efficacy of the remedy prescribed for any particular evil. Frankfurter, ‘Realism in Consti- tutional Law." “Thi in two cases in the United States Bupreme Court, vaccination and sterilisation have been fcund to efficacious in prevent the spread of smalipox and fdi have therefore been sustained against attack under the due process use of the fourteenth amendment (applicable to the States) Jacobson vs. Massachusetts (1905), 197 'IJJ. £, 11; Buck vs. Bell (1921)," 274 8. 217, “Equally, we think, the efficacy of the eighteenth amendment and its enfore- ing legislation in grevenung the spread of intemperance should be the criterion in deciding upcn its validity under the due process clause of the fifth amend- ment (epplicable to the United States). We see no difference between improv- ing the health and or morals of peo- Ele by the application of serum or the nife and improving their health and of morals closing their mouths to drink. To determine this efficacy we wflllnfllv admit is a task in comparison to which the activities of Hercules in the Augean Stables are childsplay. We do not belleve it can be done, except by the method of testimony offered in open court, with ecross-examination, #tnographic records and the other safeguards of judicial procedure. = It manifestly cannot be done on the hustings or in the market place in the atmosphere of personal abuse therein engendered. We do not consider, either, that it can be done in the halls of leg- islative bodies or in the chambers of executive commissions, where proceed- ings are subject to political criticiam and where witnesses are bound to be the result of & motre or less arbitrary selection, "We hope, therefore, that this ques- tion will be pres:nted to scme court some day. When it is, we humbly sug- gest that all concerned prepare them- selves for the investigation by carzfully read:ng chaptsr 7 of volume 2 of Lecky's great book, ‘Democracy and Libsrty’ (1896). They will find therein an unex- celled philosophical and practical dis- cussion of ths difficulties inherent in the attempt to legislate on intoxicating drink, as exempiified in the history of all the countries that have made such atempts.” . . . Quotes 1866 Argument. At the beginning of his decision Judge Clark quoted from the speech in Cone gress of Benator Dixon of Connetticut, to show that Dixon voiced the same Objections raised in the Sprague case in opposing lrgislative ratification of the fourteenth amendment. And an echo ef Senator Dixon's argument was found g: J‘I;du: 7ct‘)"k in this passage from esident Johnson's me to Oongress on ’iun- 22, 1866: sl o ‘Nor have the sov-reign people of the Nation boen affe d #n opportunity of expressing their views upon the imoors ‘ant a2t on which the nmendment in« volver, Crate dowbte. ther-f-re, may patarelv end fostlv avise as to whether the astion of Coharees 18 in hermonw Y'th the esn'i-ients of the beop's, and whethor Btats L- g s'nturcs, elected with= ou' referenca tn f1-h an issue, shou'd be called unon by Conpress to decids re- shect'ne th ratification of the prop-sd amendment Judgs Clark eited more than 100 authorities in support of his decision, end in 8o doing pictured the politieal influences which led to the framing of our Constitution and which had their TOOts In the government of the ancient cities of Qreace, . Thtoughout he Iald partioular em- phatis on the mrrlomy of the con- vention method of ratification over the ]t}zhlnllve. He reasoned that as the delegrtes to conventions were not afe facted by polities! or reifish consideras tions, thev vere better fitted than leg- istators, who eo often wete rdependent upon ro'itical leaders for thsir contin- uan®s in publiz Jife. He found that the tontention methad also made for gr-eter mechanical and psy:hological efclency. The wm of Judge Clark's “fifmu&mflmma- amendment. must be rej BURDEN CRITICIZED — Auditor Says Federal Aid Lessened Despite Greatly Increased Expenses. (Cottinued From First Page.) |718.906. In 1931, the last year for which appropriations have been made, he said the appropriations totaled $4! 500,000, the trict paying $36,000,000 and the United States $9,500,000. ~Thus it will be seen that between 1920 and 1931, declared Maj. Donovan, “the vrg&x;mlom have increased nearly $26,000,000; that the District’s proportion of $9,900,000 in 1920 has mounted to $36,000,000 in 1931 and that the United States' proportion of gn,m,ooo in 1920 has dropped to $9,- 00,000 in 1981. In other words, in the face of an increase of about 130 per cent -mnum during this e 1008y vy 8306000 son ¢ 4 B A an 1920. m:{nlwmo:mm increase in appropriations has met DBy increased taxation of real property. Bays Increases Not Parallel. “In 1020 the assessed value of taxable Teal estate amounted (on the basis of two-thirds value a by law) to $426,623,630, the tax rate was $1.50 and the total levy or tax col- lectable was $6,399,354¢. In 1931 the assessed value of real estate (on the basii of full value) is $1,211,000,000, the tax rate is $1.70 and the levy or tax Collectable 15 $20,800,000. The assessed val of taxable real estate has in- creased between this period of 1920 and 1931 by over 100 per cent and the levy or the amount actually payable in taxes een -flglve & historical airs of the Dis- luring the period from 1790 to 1878, under which there was no definite al:n of contribution by the Federal vernment. toward the support of the District, and followed this with an out- line of the subsequent fiscal policles, touching, the 50-50 plan, the 60-40 basis and finally the existing lump-sum arrangement. He then touched n the act of Congress requiring tne District to oper- ate on a ~a8-you-go basis, pointing out that for this Jurose it i8 main- taining a cash fund of $3,000,000. It has not been necessary to increase this $3,000,000 cash fund up to the resent, he explained, notwithstanding the fact that expenditures are now about 15 | 845,000,000 & year, due to_the fact that Congress now allows the District to re- celve credit for the lump sum contribu- tion on the first day of each fiscal year, and to the further fact that legislation passed in 1926 advanced the nxxytn: months from Novembet and y to September and March. “I am inclined to the view however,” said the auditor, “that with the mount= ing totals of appropriations it may be only a question of a short while before the need for considerably augmenting the $3,000,000 eash fund will be before W Traces Burplus Revenue Origin. ‘The origin of the surplus revenues to the credit of the District in the United States Treasury were next explained by Maj. Donovan. At the close of the five- year petiod, during which the District was required to raise money enough to enable it to pay its expenses, or on July 1, 1927, he said, the District sur- plus reven in the Treasury over and above the $3,000,000 cash fund amount- ed to $800,000; on July 1, 1928, thi amount had increased to $3,125,000; on 45,700,000, and on July beginnin of the present , the surplus revenues amounted to 86,600,000 At the close of the current fiscal year on June 30, 1081, Ma). Donovan said, it i anticipated that the surplus will be less than $2,000,000. eamount of the District get for the believed that the surplus will be en- tirely exhausted by June 30, 1932 “Although the bills as rende by the assessor to taxpayers for the fiscal year 1930 carried the tax rate of $1.70,” | ary f Maj. Donovan declared, “the fact is that had not the District the surplus revenues to fall back upon to supply the defieit in ourfent revenue: h rate would have been in<excess of $1.80 for that year. And in 1081, the cur- rent year, the rate, while actually $1.70 18 really $2 if°we eliminate from con- | sideration the use of surplus revenues good the deficit in current “At this time it seems evident that Al in the fiscal year 1933 the District's surplus in the Treasury will be prac- tically exnausted and that the budget for that year must be framed with only current revenues in view. What the total of the budget for that year will amount to is entirely problematical at this time.” After Maj. Donovan had completed his explanation of the surplus revenues Chairman M asked him why the District shouldn't increase its tax rate to avold the exhaustion of this fund. b 't think we ought to have a surplus,” Maj. Donovan reglhd “The budget proposed each year by the Com- missioners during the period in which this surplus was oreated contemplated the expenditure of estimated cutrent revenues, but cuts made in the budget by the Budget Bureau and sustained by Dy gress resulted in the accumulation of the surplus. 0 Believes People Want o Be Fair. Questioned by Mr. Mapes as to the tax rate in the District, Maj. Donovan said he believed the people in Wash- | ington “are perfectly willing to pay e fair, just and cOmpPArable tax, provid- ing the Unitad States pays over and abcve that amount to ‘:?véd‘e for the development of the Capi R l:mmr tax rate provided all the funds necessary, do you think the Fed- eral Government should be relieved of its contributions” asked Chaifman Mapes. "? don't believe Congress should ever be relieved of a fair and equitable part of the burden of maintaining the Capi- tal of the Nation,” Donovan answered. “I don't believe Congress would be so harsh as to fail to contribute to the support of the District.” Chairman Mapes thes i Donovan if he though the Special Com- m.ttee should try to arrive at a fair tex rate for the District, in comparison +with citics of comparable sise without any reference to the holdings of the Federal Government. | The auditor deckrbzlu l:\ ::;ptlyolt?k:: | he thought a reasgnable amot { property of the United States in the | Distriet used in the ness should be considered in arriving at a fair basis of taxation. “How much is necessary for the United States to contribute after the ple of the District have paid their air share in taxes?” inquired Mr. Mapes. Fair Tax Burden Hard to Fix. ““The difference between the fair tax the people of the District pay and the amount Congress believes to be neces: sary to l\lfirsln the Capital City," Donovan replied. He emmned, ‘how- éver, that he thought the commitf would find it difficult to establish a fzir tax burden for the District in com- perison with that in comparable citles. The committee did not complete its nn'mlil:luon of m:.llfinmv;:n ln'd‘ ":e will recalled the la o e nounced had ar- the likely will be stand en m. | F Based on the| Post bu fiscal year 1033, he explained, it 18!of the funds snmnmnn of busi- | tee | o8 Angeles Flyer Has Been Un- Article V of Constitution By the Associated Press. Article V, United States Constitution: “The Congress, whenever two-thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Con- stitution, or, on the application of the Legislatures of two-thirds of the several States, shall call a convention for the purpose of Dproposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of this Constitution when ratified by the tures of three-fourths thereof of the several States, or by conventions in three-fourths thereof as the one or the other mode of ratification may be pro- by the Congress. * * *” Amendment X: “The powers not delegated to the by the Constitution nor prohibited by it to the States are re- served to the States, respectively, or to Ay William Clask, at Newark, N. J., in holding the eighteenth ) by t 2 “If the amendment %o be considered is one designed to transfer to the Unit- ed States powers reserved to the States, or, if there be any such, to the , the answer must be in favor of the convention method.” As regards transfer of power, Judge Clark held that the only amendment resembling the eighteenth was the thir- | United States and Amendment X State Conditions Under Which Federal Document May Be Amended. CLARK. -Associated Press Photo. teenth, the siavery amendment, but the thirteenth did not grant power to reg- ulate and prohibit certain acts. INTERIOR BILL MAY GET ACTION TODAY Measure Reported to Senate With Pay Increase Pro- vision Included. The Senate may begin consideration | this afterncon of the Interior appro- | priation bill, which was reported fl’o‘m} the Appropriations Committee late yes- terday with the salary increases for po- sitions in under-average grades included. ‘The increases placed in the bill by the Benate Committee amount to $248,000 and are in accord with the budget mes- sage, which recommended that Congress make & start toward bringing up those positions throughout the Government service which are below the average uhder the classification law. The Sen- ate is supporting the Budget Bureau suggestion that 30 per cent of these under-average grades be taken care of | in the next fiscal year, and the re- mainder in the succeeding two years. Amendment Killed. The Wood salary amendment which the House put in the Treasury-Post | Office appropriation bill, and which the Senate knocked out of that measure, is no longer an issué in the Interior bill, the Houze having voted several days to reverse its inal on at amendment. This amendment wes a restriction, lhfln: that no funds in next year's bill could be used to increase num"rlu tuhh‘:“d:nde;‘. mh"“l‘:r;n:‘pn that unexpen nces in sal - tions rmmn. from deaths or resignations could not be utilised to m.'omer-x-neumthenmupan- ment. There are two separate lating to salaries at issue two houses, therefore, in the ‘e Dbill. One is the Wood amendment, the other is the allowance mm uestions re- tween the ‘Treasury: get for 30 cent of the increases needed to adjust under-average grades In the Interior bill there is only the one nuu;. of granting the additional sal- unds. Precedent Is Expected. Conferees will begin deliberating on the differences between the two hCuses in the Tre -Post Office bill within the next g{hew mys. 11?11 it is "l::r llly x| at the policy regar sal- ary inereases will be settled in con- {}"{fl”"“""(‘, Lh‘nt hll‘lL lm “h"m"ml" e Senate wins eepl) e sal- ar in the ’l“;euury- it Office biil the e: tation is that the same course will be followed in all the other principies. are involved. The Senate today named the five Senators who will represent it in con- ferences with the House on the Treas- ury-] Office approptiation bill, in which the policy regarding salary in- creases for next year is expected to be definitely settled one way or another. The Senate conferees are: Senators Phipps, Republican, of Colorado; Smoot, Republiean, of Utah; Moses, Republican, of New Hampshire; Harris, Democrat, of Georgia, and Glass, Democrat, of Virginia, PRESIDENT TO RECEIVE REPORT ON PROHIBITION Commission Expected to File Its Conclusions on Law Enforcement at an Early Date. By the Associated Press. The Law Enforcement Commission now is expected at the White House to riation bills, because the same | g JURY AWARDS $4.000 IN SLANDER AGTION Mrs. Lee Ordered to Pay Sum to Mrs. Ford for Alleged Statement. Mrs. Marguerite du Pont Lee, 68- year-old wiaow, relative of the au Pont 1amily of Delaware, was assessed $4,000 damages by a Disirict Supreme Court jury before Justice Frederick L. Siddons for an all slanderous statement re- flecting on the morality of Mrs. Maude Bell Ford, also a widow, and accusing her of having caused the intoxication of Rev. Willlam Thomas Reynolds, for- mer pastor of Grace Episcopal Church of Georgetown. After two hours’ deliberation the jury reported compensatory damages of 82,000 against Mrs. Lee and added an- other $2,000 as punitive damages. ‘The jury was com| of ten men and two women, rs. Ford brought . rged that Mrs. Lee had made reflections .Ya..e‘t““ her morality and had atcused of causing the intoxication of the Rev. William Thomas Reynolds, former rector of Grace Epis- copal Church in Georgetown, when the minister was conducting a healing ser- vice at a fashionable l%lscoml Hmrch nse;'r Washington Circle in February, After a number of love letters from the elderly defendant to the 40-year-old minister had been read to the jury, and after two witnesses for the defense had testified to seeing th: minist:r drunk on more than one occasion and one in- sisting that he had appeared intoxicated at the healing service, Mrs. Lee took the stand in her own defense. She made an absolute denial of the charge of re- flecting on the morality of Mrs. Ford, but admitted that she had said that Mr. Reynolds was intoxicated. ‘guments to the jury were made by Atiorneys W. Gwynn Gardiner, Edward L. Marthill and South Trimble, jr., for !herfll.lnflfl, and by Amme‘a J. Ed- ;u Butroughs and Mackall & Mackall POR— SENATE DROUGHT RELIEF BILL IS CUT AND FOOD LOAN HIT (Continued Prom First Page.) relief, Mr. Aswell. ‘We can’t go out and l:rz,lp. every little farmer in the coun- “You are too_much of human nature under the Senate proposal. Farmers get to look to the ment or easy money, and it is destructive.” Aswell then asked the Agriculture ry for a better plan. Hyde hes. itated, and replied, “You have hit the a\‘a‘utlnn that has been bothering us, and t is the reason we are willing to along with you up to a certain point.” The Agriculture Committee had Hyde before it at its own request, made it again had rejec! & Democratic proposal to &, ve the Senate's $60,- 000,000 drought blll, carrying the dis- puted food loan provision. !Emaen of the 80 million plan have insisted vari- ously that it came to them from Hyde, from other responsible sources in the Department of Agriculture or from the National Drought Relief Committee, The figure appeared first here in cons nection with a meeting of State drought committees. Before the Senate today also was the report of its Conference Committee on the $116,000,000 public works bill, rec- ommending - abandonment of amend- ments to restrict the President's discre- tion in spending the money, control the w:{.-s to be paid on its projects, and make special provisions for some States. report its conclusions on prohibition to President Hoover in two or three weeks. White House officials said today the report would be transmitted to Con- greas as soon as it hes been réceived and studied by the President. FRENCH STORE BOMBED BY MYSTERIOUS COUPLE | None Hurt by Explosion Which Awakens Lyon’ Inhabitants. Witness Gives Clue. By the Associated Press. LYON, France, December 17—A bomb placed on the sidiwalk in front of a big department storé here exploded 'at 5:30 am. today, creating a tremen- dous concussion which awoke the in- Hhabitants ot this eity. Windows of the store and of adjoining | buildings were shatt:red. Nobody was injured. A witness to the e lon said that just prior to the blast he saw a man carrying a package walk to the store, lnvnhf.p&u “on!.helld join & mys! woman in black. MRS. FAHY’S RECOVERY REGARDED DOUBTFUL eonselous Since Crash Monday at Tonopah, Nev. By the Associated Press. TONOPAH, Név., December 17.—Hos« pital ‘l“tm nts ut':dly sald &n‘fii Fahy, Los , Who suf« since the s plane crashed here Monday. dent, has | to aeci- | the for Senator Jones, Mguhllenn. Washing- ton, head of the conferees, sought votes of rejection on each of these proposals. Senators Dill of Washington and Mc- Kellar of Tennessee, both Democrats, wanted the Benate to insist upon them, Senator Robinson of Arkansas, who had the restriction on the President inserted, refused to fight its removal, in the in- terest of getting the legislation passed as quickly as possible. Recess Plang Torn Up. Christmas recess plaps were torn up after Rnfir-ennnvt Garner of Texas, Democratic leader, charged the Repub- lican leaders with filibustering to pre vent action on drought relief until after Christmas. He threatened to block any agreement on & Christinas recess, Similar threats developed in the Sen- ate and the Republican leader, Senator Watson of Indiana, sought out the House majority chief, Tison of Con- necticut. After their talk, Watson an- nounced: “We cannot and will not -fim to the Christmas recess until this rellel legisiation is enacted.” SENATE TO CALL WOODS. By the Associated Press. The BSenate today adopted the la Tollette resolution requesting the Ap- tions Committée to invite Ool. ur Woods of the President’s Emer- gency Employment Committee and other officers connected with unemploy- ment relief before it. Senator Watson, the Republican lead- er, asked the Senate to support the motion of Senator La Follette, Repub- lican, Wisconsin, for its approval. President Hoover yesterday declined to submit to the from Col. Woods, stating he had confidential notes and data. The n Cross; ‘tor officers i c! and By 80 SLAYING OF BUSH Mahoney Testifies to Same Purport—Case Goes to Jury Tomorrow. A bianket denial that he had slain Louis Bush, bus line operator, October 6 last, or attempted to injure him, was made by Willlam J. Carnell at his trfal in District Supreme Court today on & charge of murdering Bush. Carnell was preceded to the witness stand by his co-defendant, Frank Ma-" honey. “Both defendants insisted they B I A astempiea rovoery. They an attem) T h declared the only object had been to obtain all the money possible. Although both the defense and the Government had rested their cases early this afternoon, it was not the case would go to the jury before to- morrow. Attorneys were undecided how ::1: their arguments to the jury would Gives Version of Shooting. e pistol and Bush had his hand wrapped aroundl the butt when the weapon was discharged, inflicting the fatal wound. Mahoney was placed on the witness stand soon after the Government had rested its case againtt the joint des fendants. This defense maneuver was emgloyed after Justice Peyton Gordon overruled a motion by counsel-for Carnell and Mlhonei' that the jury be directed that the defendants could mot :rfound guilty of the firsi el ‘harge. m’!;u'mnu ing his wife had left him Septem- r 16. He declared he with great regularity as a domestic troubles, coupled fact that he was unemployed. Remembered Bush’s Ring. The defendant told the jury he was riding around with Carnell looking for some one “to stick up” when he noticed Bush leave the Plaza Hotel. He sald he told h's companion Bush made it a custom to wear a diamond ring and should be worthwhile prey. Mahoney explained he and Carnell followed Bush part of the way to his home, at 3534 Fulton street. Before arriving there, he said, the; Bush he arrived in order to surprise him wi at his garage, in rear of his home. He testified plans were made for Carnell to perform “the actual hold-up and for Mahoney to walt nearby in their auto- MOiReiore he got t of th - “Before got out of ear, “1 sald, '&m-u, way.' He domt harm that man in arm that man in a nlam n't. I never :ho?'nnybody in my lf: Mahoney denled Le had stayed near the scene to carry out his part of the plot. Says He Drove Home. He declared he drove dir:et to his ! home without waiting for Carnell, “Wiy did you buy bullets for tha pistol it lidn't want to harm any one?” Willlam H. Collins, an A'!lllll} United States attorney, demanded Mahoney on cross-examinetion, “I don’t know,” the witn es responded. ‘The motion for a directed verlict of not guilty in so far es the firt de- gree murder charge i3 concerned wos originally offered by Touls L. White- stone, counse: for Carnell, Counsel for Mahoney later joined in the motion. Whitestone contended the Goveinment had failed to show Bush had been shot purposely. < He called attention to de- cisions of the Court of ;Appeals l‘ which law was laid down that in_ firs degree murder cafes It must be shown thnl(he fatal wound was inflicted pur- posely. Testify About Driaking: Mrs. L. A Harper of 28 Bates street. with whom Mahoney made his home testified he hed showed signs of in- toxisation almost dally from the time his wife deserted him until the date of the slaying. Similar testimony was given by John Mahoney of the same address, an uncle of the defendant. O. T. Smith, a shorthand reporter, called as & witness by the defense, de- clared his notes showed Lilllan Lud & member of the Bush household, had testified at a_coroner’s inquest into the death ot Bush that she heard him say: “I am shot.” Attorneys explained they had called Smith in hl:l ef ul:ywml:luw m‘n;u- mony yesterday same witness that she had heard Bush say: “Lil, he shot me here.” Leroy Gaylor, manager of Bush's bus line, the last witness for the Govern- ment, declared Mahoney formerly hat been employed as a t-seeing bus driver and 'fl.\: aware that Bush wore & diamond L. n of the man ‘William ush, 801 slain, testified late yesterday that two days honey had visited him his father dled to express his sorrow. o S X ploymeni e since the murder, o EMERGENCY PAY ROLL WILL EXCEED MILLION New York Committee Reports De- mand for Jobs Continues. $8,000,000 Fund Sought. By the Associated Press. NEW YORK, = December 17.—The Emergency Employment Committee of New York Oity, today reported that by the enc. of this week the total pay roil already expended will exceed $1,000,000. Funds raised by ‘:’he committee are ey , Wl vided with work in the city departments and in non-profit-making institutions, ‘The demand for jobs, the committee re~ Ported, continues without abatement, The committee is seeking an $8,000,000 employment fund. ¥ IKE BLOOM DIES AT 65 CHICAGO, December 17 (#).—Isaac Gitelson, better known as ITke Bloom— the best known figure in Chicago's night life for many years—died Mon- d-‘ night. loom, once a power in Democratie lities, operated Frieberg's Cafe, the rightest spot of the Twenty-second street district, two decades ago. M: was 65 years old.