| Show Cl Clarification n of ott W i Needed Neede b Pro pit ii i Mrs D De scribes scribes' Noted Gases on on t f S Agents Agents' genia Rights s i 1 By Dy M MABEL BE W WALKER WILLE- WILLE BRANDT I Copyright 1929 by Current Ne News s Features Inc All All for foJ o Publication Rea Reserved l ThrOughout Through 1 out the World erl In t is article t the e sixteenth sixteenth o of her series Mrs Mr bral dt begin bogis the subject of maki g ti-ic ti punishment punish punish- ment n fj fit the the c crime ime thai th clarifying and interpreting the statutes apply ing t tb to prohibition offenses oU which preceded the thea passage a g of the famous famous' Jones Jon raw law This Thie pi piece legislation she sho will ill deal with subs subsequently S there Before fore there c cm can n be any kind Of r effective law lav there J has as asto to b Ill very vey definite detinUe and ander er certain to enforce e One of or orthe the tle great of ot the t tl has be been n that tl o things thinS's dono done in Sn the the-namo pf pt prohibition on en en- n hn have been b beyond ond the law Some of that is right With any new lit statute tute it is of th the Utmost importance r ane en early ly to clarify its In Interpretation in- in terp and Unify Its tion This Tills C can 1 only be done b y carrying disputed points point t to the highest courts for or se settlement Muth MUch Muthof of or my effort in the n 1 t eight years has hat direction I have e watched vigilantly for tor bout about eight years the decisions of courts ll l m of liquor laws hi in the tho two districts of oC the United a When n a v of opinion arose aroc be between between be- be tween j Judges I ye pr d to ci Ji Ret get t the thc question before higher l When harmony 1 of c could not be obtained d In Li adr vari var- paS pago r rj r c j w v 1 S 5 4 f A Clarification Iari c ti m n of Law oA Needed dd by Y Prohibition Pr 1 I Continued from page 1 ous circuit co courts ds of ot appeal th the Q question h 1 leas has been br brought ll ht to the I supreme mc court of th the tho United States Just winning tho case is much lest less important than cl citifying t the law With the tho able assistance of or Mahlon Mali Mah- Ion lon D. D IJ Kie cr el who las headed beaded the he I appeals section in lit m my office and andS S Sew all l Key c who vho thou though h primarily on tax ta work has luis rendered yeoman service on 00 many briefs I have bave submitted submitted sub sub- cases cocos rS ort orl bi briefs to o tile tho court court of ot th the tho UI United States and have helped to settle finally disputed interpretations in fn nearly two two scores of or cases lUg argued and briefed on tho merIts R. R cry Every one of at these decisions brought ro eCI where legal confusion had been jeen b roie I RIGHTS RIGHTS- UPHELD ELD IIa Have o you u not oCt often n been in doubt I whether prohibition agents ts have h ve a aright right to stop cars on the road load So had we 0 until th tie the law Jai was s settled about three years ago The case caso o 0 United States States' vs s. Carroll U U. S. S was wai as briefed cd and argued l' twice In an effort Cort to t decide whether a n acar acar car can ln be e stopped on n the highway without agents first fIrst getting a search warrant The Thc supreme e cou court Itself Usel deliberated over vcr the thus matter for tor man many months The Tho chief chic Justice finally nd d d down wn an opinion in twenty page pages which h reviewed the law law- from ancient times and de dc do decided that although as agents nl l cannot ot stop Just any car they please the they mn nini without n n. s search warra warrant stop one one tho the movements of which they thc have hae observed enough to tobe be reasonably rca rca- c certain r n of or its violation ot 02 law lai This decision has proved lo to be a I bulwark of ot strength in dealing with rum ium runners along the border bolder The court mado it it plain that every case must rest on 03 Its own But the facts Which they held sufficient to stop and search the Cat Carroll roll car were first the agents agents' Knowledge ih that lt it had previously PIC be been n used to 9 cirl carry liquor second the thc tact fact that It Jt was proceeding tr from m the tho Canadian Cana Cana- di dian dlan n border and third that h t. t its springs verc cre very h heavily a weighted down Iown with an unusual load The public JS Isery Is very ery to break brcak into criticism without t waiting to Know t the tio e fact facts when prohibition agents stop cars It is wen well to remember that thc the supreme court court of or theU the tile United U States has ha has j spoken affirmatively affirmatively affirm affirm- in ia upholding th their lr ir right to todo todo todo do so under some soniC circumstances Another nother recent victory victor in fit interpreting inter inter- and strengthening the pro pro- law lat is Js the case ot of United States vs So larron Tarron 7 U. U S S. 92 Bootleggers Keep their bOOM books Just like business men They re record ord the amount 0 of liquor handled and arid the payments of or graft to the police pollee officers of- of and others on ott whose protection tion iloni on the they dep depend nd Because of or the constitutional guarantee guarantee- to protect a defendant from having to testify against himself arid and to protect his books and papers from froni ron seizure without a a. search earch warrant most courts at first refused to allow bootleggers bootleggers' and md oth other r lawbreakers books which aro arc kept to record their illegal al business to be used cd against them Government agents in the Marron case went Into a blind pig In San Francisco They arrested the proprietors and seized d. d the books The Theio o w was s much difference of ot opinion between li tween Cov government lawyers as to wh such eIde evi- evi de tco could be De used With deep conviction I briefed ed and argued the sic view V that tho thc constitution never Intended in intended intended in- in tended to a mantle ot of protection pro pro- around records of ot crime t found tind Incident to the tho arrest of a lawbreaker The supreme court upheld this view vie LEARNS EARNS RESPECT FOR LAW Set Settling ng thc tile law in this ic respect has proved pro ro ed 0 of great groat value In tho the offensive of of- of r- r against i it big liquor violators Iol tors They recognize it too R Recently I listened to testimony 1 in Mc McNeil ell island penitentiary of ot a bootLegger er who described how after artea tile the Marron Marron Matron Mar Mat ron case crise the ring rin of ot which h ho was was wasa a member co constructed a room Under un un- der their theft garage It opened by a trap door in the tile garage l flOor or whIch switch In Inthis Inthis responded to an nn electric this vault ault all books b and papers were kept and n niI all records of oe graft grutt pay payments pay hay ments menta and t accountings cout between h tho the in Ir crime He lIe re said sald We weren't going to argue wIth will tho the court cOUlt after that Marron Mar Mr Marron ron case case cas and iun run the th rl risk risk- k o of our our books revealing ail the thc Inner workings work walk ln ings s of ot our our business I am here re rem taking m my Jolt but there aro a L l lot loto t tot o of ot our crowd still s out because YOU yot 1 0 didn't get our our books bools when you arrested nr ar- ar tested rested mc me I r have always s felt that the tho th worst prohibition offender is the agent or official who shuts huts hla his eyes eyes' to some favored violators violator's acts It used to b bo JY believed however that that- there thero was as no way to punIsh such an agent other than by reprimanding manding or ot firing tiring him This gave him him mere merely because he ho wore a tI badge a a a kind of ot Jm Im im immunity that always alwn's rankled me A caso entitled United States vs s Donnell Donnell Donnelly Don Don- nell nelly 27 1 arose Jn involving thu tho very question Tho prohibition director of ot a n. western state was was convicted convicted con con- of C to prosecute a Ii arum rum when he had hod plain evidence evi dence of oe his violation of ot law The Thc prohibition director defended himself him hini- I self on the ground round that the prohibition 11 act punished only onh commissions commis commis- of crime not om omissions 1 on I the part of or age agents ta who failed to l report Olt crime It was wa's was a t. nl legal point Join Lawyers w ers hero here were split over it and the sl court itself was even cven finally divided B But t I insisted that congress intended to catch defaulting default ing big agents just as much a as as' boot boot- loggers Mr Ml Mitchell attorney general then solicitor general down my first brief and wrote One ono no himself on tile the other of or tho qt question Vh When n the tho ho c case case se was as set down for argument again I persisted in iii my view v and Attorney Attorney ne ney General Mitchell like the fair fair- minded lawyer that he is Js said Go EGo ahead I. I File ne the bri brief r ne according to your own views but I cant can't sign It with joun you Wo We had much ouch friendly rivalry in tho department lover over the tho thola la fact t that I went wOnt be before ro the court to argue a a. view of or the tile law lav with m my mys s superior officers officer's ers er's brief brier on file presenting presenting pre pre- the other side The Tho out- out comb however left leU the smile with J me for Jor although h two Justices dissented dis dis- th tile the supreme courts court's majorIty major major- Ity opinion adopted my interpretation tion lIon of or th the law and the tho opinion was written by kY Justice Butler Butler Attorney ne ney Gen General Genral ral Mitchells Mitchell's former law partner and cl close se friend Ho said Eald page paso Diligence and go good d' d faith falU on n the thel part of oC enforcement officers ar arc es essential es- es I. I The rhe infliction of punIshment punishment pun pun- pun pun- for lor their thell Intentional hite viola vlola- is an appropriate m means ans to hold Itoh them to the tho performance e of t their duties duties' I. I Th This s opinion has has' had a a. noticeably wholesome and rind cleansing mh g. g effect on ona on agents a and United States attorneys s sn n alike ike FOREIGN NATIONS OBJECT N Not only has s it been necessary to strengthen tho the law Jaw at h home honie by se securing securing se- se curing a a. a final interpretation by higher courts of or questionable fice sections sections sec sec- ot of it ft but it If has Jias' been essential essential essen- essen essen essen- Ual to deal with oth other r knotty knott problems pr b- b re hems lems Involving interim international law w t td to Keep the country from bein being flooded with liquor from foreign shores snores Tho The raiding of a bootleg establishment 11 in Chicago without proper search warrant does not produce v very ry serious consequences but the but the thc seizure of t a British h ship cn c even though actually laden With Into intoxicating I eating cating liquor intended h for tor thirsty t American throats may produce o very veri serious ous consequences If tho seizure h his has 9 not been ii in acc accor accordance ance with in international hi- hi nn law One co consequence may b be tho the payment of heavy dam dalE damages ages by tho the United States government govern I ment and another and cn C ven more serious eon ib Js the ie building up or of bad feeling between no nations Tho The extent of ot tho thio running rum business between foreign shores and ancl the thc United States tc may be bo gauged be-gauged gauged bytho by bytho tho tue fact that within two years after aCte c wc 0 hn mt made 1 a tr treaty rity with c extending lH tile the distance within which WIlch wo might make mako captures six fifty 8 X British lun running rum v vessels were tr seized d. d There Ther were of ot course many other English rum ships as well as ass as s ships ot of o other nations loaded with liquor for fori America that cither were not detected or were n not hot t captured In 1921 the hovering operations of oC foreign n vessels mostly flying fl ln tho the British flag amounted to a national scandal 1 As a practical al matter most of ot rum row hovered from twelve to twenty miles off ore shore but s sent nt their cargoes in fn close se toland toland to toland land by means of t small dories It was as like catching ng mo mosquitoes to lo ap- ap ap n these dories Jf If thc the parent ships were seized o outside of ot the the three mile limit into Which they s seldom dom ventured d England and nd other foreign countries countrIes' under whoso whose flags s the they were registered d would protest and usual usually the thc state department wo would 1 turn the Ute ship loose One day tho the assistant United States attorney at Boston reported to nie me a a. z et t o of facts n that lh t I 1 felt sure t Would admit of or a vigorous policy on tho the pa part t of ot tho tue United States s' s government gO gov gov- and perhaps perhaps' make mako some some neW new law on the tho subject The Tho Grace and Ruby was was' hovering ho about ab ut ten miles ort oft Glo Gloucester Mass M Men Mn n cn came canie nc out from the thc shore in a t motor sotor motorboat bo boat t the thc II IT A part of the Grace and Rubys nubs crew helped to load liquor nt the Wilkin II 11 and then thou climbed into a dory dor which belonged belonged be be- longed Jon 1 to the parent schooner U tlC tied c cItto it to tho the Wilkin II It and ani went ashore ashon N not Mot t only was ivas' ivas as Wilkin ln II seb seized d b but t. t also the patent parent ship Still Great Britain mado protest I became b c mo so o interested In seeing tho tIo law crystallized by carrying the I case casc to court COUlt that I went ov over r to the tho department and literally took off my hat and coat and antI rolled up my sleeves es to tp J argue with with solicitors tors of or that department and nd representatives of tho the British govern govern- govern govern- ment I could not bear beLr to sea seo the United States ml miss s tim tho chanco chance of ot turning one nc of or Great Britain's own d decisions against ag her That was one on where e the schooner Araunah had lad been hov hovering ring off ot se seal 1 banks but jut sept sent her crew and small mahI bo boats ts within a 3 foreign So governments government's territorial territorial ter ter- waters to kill seals The British government gov hind hat agreed as that that constituted an offense by the parent ship In other words word the parent larent snIp ship had made a t. construe construe- tWo lve entry into IRto foreign n territorial v. v waters b by means of ot her own small bo bOats ts crew and tackle That was the he argument w wo p put up in ti th the Gr Grace Graco co and nub Ruby cas case The court sustained it It and the United States government held this rum ship This Tills theory of or constructive entry sen serf serin hampered rum row In it her next article Mrs Wille Wille- brandt will record some of of- the legal adventures affecting malt and nd y yeast ast and explain her he position in regard to o the famous Jones law I irl |
