Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1918-03-08
Retroactive Laws AbhoTent.


The anti-prohteering law which Con-
sress finally enacts ought not to be
retroactive, whether the Johnson. Poin-
dexter or Tinkham bill is made the
basis of the legislation
II the law Furnishes extortion or
rentals usury as a misdemeanor, direct
" or indirectly, in substance and effect,
whatever eamoutlaging words may be
employed, its retroactive application viii
be stunned by Congress as a violation
of the letter and spirit of the ex post
facto prohibition.
p The law should be distinctly either
criminal OF civil IN its nature. If the
former. the accused must have the priv
ilege of tria! by jury in criminal court,
the presumption of innocence before
proof of guilt. and protection against
ex post facto legislation.
The Johnson bill suggests, in this re-
spect, case OF legislative false pre-
lenses. It is criminal-punishing in
purpose and effect, but masquerades
verbally as civil legislation, in the dis
guise of an ordinary tax law, or a
rentals fixing law, affecting only civil
contracts. In convicting and Furnishing
the exfortioncr and rentals usurer it
refrai1s from giving the accused, limo
cent or guilty, the constitutional priv
ilece of trial by jury in criminal court,
end then makes the denial of this con
stitutional privilege the basis of deny
ing another-that of protection against
conviction and punishment under an ex
post faeto law.
The Johnson bill makes statutory ex-
tortioners of thousands who have not
e1torted. Cannot a just law be framed
which will punish only convicted extor-
TONERS, prevent future extortion and
secure to the government from the peo-
pie of the District maximum of hons
ing facilities at non-eStortionate rates?
Pat assuming that the criminalpun-
ishing features Of the Johnson bill are
eliminated, the law should not even then
be retroactive 1t clearly impairs the
obligation OF contracts
The Star has recognized that the ma
tional legislature is not forbidden By
: the Constitution to impair the obliga-
ton of contracts, but has urged that
equity, consistency and decency enforce
this prohibition Congress will not i'm
%ha
lation, everywhere else under the ban,
/. merely because the Constitution omits
to forbid If.
The Star said:
"A law that inpairs the obligation of
contracts, that in 1913 voids lawful
leases Of 1917, even in eases where both
parties to the contract are content, can
not without violating the Constitution
be enacted by state legislature. Such
? law, though not specifically forbidden
: by the Constitution to the national leg
islature, is in general so inherently in
equitable and abhorrent that only in
extreme cases, to overcome q greater
szevil, will Congress resort TO It.
In legislatirg for the District alone
under the Miles Square provision
of the Constitution Congress serves the
District as the substitute of a state
legislature. A state legislature is for
hidden by the Constitution to impair the
obligation of contracts.
What the home state legislatures NAV
. not constitutionaliy enact in application
: to the people of the states will not be
P, enacted by Congress, acting as the Dis
: trict's state legislature, in application
to the people of Washington. B."
The evil to be cured and prevented
is present and future rentals prcfteer-
! ing. Why not apply an effective rem
edy quickly to the evil of today? Why
not simplify and expedite the legislative
flask by cutting out all of the inequitabIe
and obnoxious retroactive provisions of
the Johnson bill?