New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1913-01-07
ATTACKS SULLIVAN LAW
Judge Says Citizens Need Guns
to Protect Home.
MEASURE LOOSELY DRAWN
Did Not Fulfil Intention of
Those Who Voted for It,
Declares Swami.

Judge Edward Swami. Of General Ses-
sons, believes the Sullivan concealed
weapons law. which, under the decision
case last week, makes the possession"
of revolver or other concealable fire.
arm a misdemeanor. should be amended
Moreover. he is of the opinion that 1t
will soon be amended so that a citizen
may keep a revolver for the protection OF
his home without becoming a criminal.
The present law, as construed by the
Appellate Division, Judge Swami says.
does not fulfil the intention I'm the minds
OF those who voted for IT.
Since the decision by the Appellate Di-
vision against Joseph +. Darling.
lawyer, who had himself arrested for
having revolver in his house. In order
to test the law. Judge Swami has had
numerous telephone calls and letters ask
ing advice from friends who acknowl-
edged the possession of revolver and
wanted to know what to do. Some of
these men had had the weapons for years
without using them. Others had bought
them more recently because of numerous
DuGSIdTleS IN tilclT vicinity.
II have no idea" said Judge Swami,
that the good citizens who asked my
advice upon the question Of keeping
revolver I'm the bureau drawer are the
only ones who are worried lest they are
violating the law. Judging by the pro-
portion of my friends who called me up.
there must be thousands OF them. 1t IL
advice, and the best | could do was TO
allay their fears.
I'm the first place. the decision by the
Appellate Division-and by a divided
court at that's not final The case will
undoubtedly be carried to the Court Of
Appeals.
THE judges OF General Sessions have
in general construed the law according
TO the intention of the legislators.
should have hesitated TO ascribe TO the
Legislature of this state the intention of
making a criminal out of the honest citi-
zen who keeps a revolver in his bureau
drawer to protect his home. Personally
should never send 10 prison a good
citizen who. frightened because of re-
cent burglaries i'm his neighborhood, Kept
revolver in his home.
However. there Is no doubt M my
mind that the construction placed upon
the law by the Appellate Division Is the
correct one. There is also no doubt that
IL is not the meaning which the lesisa-
tors had I'm mind. Many of the legisla-
tors who voted IN favor OF the bill have
told me as much. and have slgni1cd their
intention OF amending the law il the near
future. II is their intention. rs II was
In the first place. to make the possession
mentioned in the law actual physical pos
session. and not constructive possession.
This so-callod Sullivan law and It's
consequences bring wildly before the pub
lie the loose way In which our laws are
drawn. The legislators have a certain
purpose In mind and try 10 express It in
the statute The language used, how
ever. must be construed strictly and In
accordance with accepted usage TIE
result IL that in actual practice the Law
frequently either falls far short OF what
the legislators intended. or. as in the
case OF the concealed weapons Jaw, II
overshoots the mark.
1T Is unfortunate that there is not
some way OF passing upon the form a..d
substance OF law while it is still In
the making. There should be some keen.
honest lawyer at Albany who should pass
on bills and interpret the language used.
Then the legislators would have Some
idea as TO whether "A law would carry
out the intention they had In mind when
th.v voted for IL -